Conflicting Minds

We have, from time immemorial, been mystified by the unexplained. Dreams have always fascinated me, from my childhood days; some of them deathly frightening, others wonderfully pleasurable.

One of the earliest dreams I can remember having was one where I was a construction worker being devoured by an oversized smelly Shrek-like creature (Not friendly). And as one would expect, I didn't like the idea of being eaten alive, and woke up pretty unnerved. But that was not the last I would see of Sir Reeksalot. He did visit again, a little under half a dozen times between then and now, and what interests me is that every time (after the first), I was able to control the dream and prevent the monster from detaching my head from the rest of me, one way or another.

A dream is the battle between the conscious and the subconscious. This is something I would like to call " The Theory of Conflicting Minds ".
The subconscious is a sick kid and starts it, and throwing up anything it eats. The conscious is a janitor. At some point, it realizes that the floor is too puked up, and decides to clean up. Conflict. Two options lie ahead.

Option 1 : Squeaky clean
C : Wake up! This is weird.
S : [Alt-F4]
C : Oh, that was just a dream.

Option 2 : Perpetual Filth
C : This is a dream! Wake u... No wait, this seems interesting!
(S happily continues dreaming, oblivious to C's presence)
C : This sucks. I'm going in!
(C butts in; overrides S. S quickly regains control. But the damage has already been done.
C continues observing.)

Option 1 is what happens most of the time. Janitor cleans up; sends the kid back home.

Option 2, though, delivers infinite possibilities. Janitor cleans every now and then (or chooses to watch from a distance and not get his hands dirty), kid pukes every now and then. A dream can be controlled in bits and pieces, and although the level of control is minuscule, it makes a world of difference.

Try it, it's an exhilarating rush!
My sympathies to those unfortunates who sleep dreamlessly.

Reductio ad absurdum

Reductio ad absurdum, Lat. : Reduction to the absurd

The classic proof by contradiction. The following proves that the universe may not exist.
Caution: Not for the weak-minded.

A thought experiment:


Let the universe exist, and let us exist in it.

• Consider two human beings : specimen 'A' , that can distinguish between colours the way "normal" humans are expected to, and specimen 'B' who, from birth, sees only in shades of "grey", but can nevertheless, differentiate between colours from the shade of "grey" that he perceives. Note that B does not know what colour would look like to A, and has no way of finding out without swapping memories, and thus assumes that A sees as he does. Vice- versa. Now, present each of them with a colour, say "blue", and ask them what colour it is. Each will say blue, despite the fact that their perceptions are completely different!(If you don't follow, start with a human being and a talking dog.)
  

• Extending this to beings in general, it is possible, that each of us would see the colour blue differently, but would still call it blue. That being said, it is possible that the universe looks different to each of us, just that when we describe it in a common language, descriptions by different people may be coherent despite a possible incoherence in perception.

• Let me take the same argument and push it over the boundaries of colour, and into those of sight in general. And then to the other four senses. Therefore, the universe might be perceived differently by different observers.

• Now, let us go back to the assumption that the universe exists and we live in it. Being inhabitants of the same universe, we must all receive the same stimuli. And since there can be an infinitely large number of observers, there can thus be infinitely large number of perceptions. (One for each observer at the least.)

• Now, we have an event( the existence of the universe), and an infinite number of possible observations (an infinite number of observers with as many distinct perceptions of the universe). Basic probability kicks in: the probability of any one observation being true is zero, and since there are infinite possible disinct observations, none of them are true. This leads us to the conclusion that the event may never happen, the event in this case being the existence of the universe. ( I use the word "may" because the argument pivots on whether different observers have different perceptions.)
  

We can now make the statement : It is possible that the universe does not exist,which contradicts our initial assumption. Hence, our assumption must be incorrect.

Reductio ad absurdum, Lat :Reduction to the absurd

Hence, there is a finite probability that the universe does not exist. (And neither do we!).

Quad erad demonstratum.