@TitusPlaysChess123 said [^](/forum/redirect/post/GfskCgeI)
> *How do I know that this world isn't all a dream?*
> *Does God exist, and is it possible to prove it?*
> *What if I wasn't walking around in a body, but was really just a brain in a jar that thinks it has a body?*
> *What if a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?
Those are the same question, which could be reformulated : "How much of the world correspond to our actual observation" except the "is it possible to prove it" which is not a philosophical question since it has a definite answer, being "no, per definition". regarding this question, god is the same as Descartes evil demon.
> *Is it possible to do absolutely nothing?*
not even rocks can do that. the only way to do absolutely nothing is to have a temperature of 0ºK
@TitusPlaysChess123 said [^](/forum/redirect/post/GfskCgeI)
> *How do I know that this world isn't all a dream?*
> *Does God exist, and is it possible to prove it?*
> *Is it possible to do absolutely nothing?*
> *What if I wasn't walking around in a body, but was really just a brain in a jar that thinks it has a body?*
> *What if a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?*
you can’t, look into lucid dreaming though it’s sick
I don’t know, not without His intervention
define nothing
pseudo Boltzmann brain and leans into solipsism, it’s a cool concept
I’ve never understood this question, it still makes vibrations, if not heard.
@Voldstar said [^](/forum/redirect/post/7RpusbSk)
> > *How do I know that this world isn't all a dream?*
>
> There’s a part of your brain that distinguishes the two, but really, you can’t.
>
> > *Does God exist, and is it possible to prove it?*
>
> Whether or not He exists is a matter of faith, but I think it is not possible to prove it.
>
> > *Is it possible to do absolutely nothing?*
>
> No. Because ...
@Voldstar any way you can prove any of your answers?
no. A proof is both absolute and binary. Not only do proofs not exist in science, but these are questions that are also impossible to prove wrong. Note that the use of “prove” here is suboptimal. Meaning, we cannot *ever* show that something will always be complete correct in science, but we can show a hypothesis to be wrong. If it is not falsifiable, it is not science, and these are all philosophical questions with no provable or scientific answers to them. These are all just my opinions, relying on common sense or simple intuition.
@TitusPlaysChess123 said [^](/forum/redirect/post/GfskCgeI)
> How do I know that this world isn't all a dream?
When we are sleeping and have a dream we are compare it to the real world (Wake up life) but if when we are saying this world is dream, my question is with respect to what? There is nothing to compare with, right?
But there is one thing the way we are experience the world, seeing different colors like green, blue,red etc they are just created by our brain, they are all wavelengths which we are study in physics. So there are certain gap between the actual world is and one we perceive. Same with sounds, temperature etc.
@TitusPlaysChess123 said [^](/forum/redirect/post/GfskCgeI)
> Does God exist, and is it possible to prove it?
Don't see god as like humans with some supernatural power, see it as a "Truth is God".
So, the answer is Yes but not as we generally thinks.
"proofs not exist in science"
* Proofs do exist in science.
It has been proven the Sun consists of helium and hydrogen.
It has been proven electrons, protons, neutrons, neutrinos exist.
It has been proven atoms are in Brownian motion.
It has been proven the Universe expands.
It has been proven the Universe is 13.8 billion years old.
^
Isn't it more:
Has not been shown to be incorrect.
Proof exists in math.
Proof of existence exists in science too. I gave examples.
Proof of a theory is not possible, but proof of a theory being false is possible, e.g. Newtonian mechanics are proven to be incorrect on very small and very large scales.
@tpr said [^](/forum/redirect/post/V9PXJj3q)
> "proofs not exist in science"
> * Proofs do exist in science.
> It has been proven the Sun consists of helium and hydrogen.
> It has been proven electrons, protons, neutrons, neutrinos exist.
> It has been proven atoms are in Brownian motion.
> It has been proven the Universe expands.
> It has been proven the Universe is 13.8 billion years old.
Nah, science, by definition, does not concern itself with proof. Science deals with evidence. Logic and mathematics use proofs. Those examples you gave are highly supported by evidence, but not proven in an absolute sense, because that is impossible.