A common way to evade the mental Universe is to invoke ‘decoherence’ — the notion that ‘the physical environment’ is sufficient to create reality, independent of the human mind. Yet the idea that any irreversible act of amplification is necessary to collapse the wave function is known to be wrong: in ‘Renninger-type’ experiments, the wave function is collapsed simply by your human mind seeing nothing. The Universe is entirely mental.Do you agree?
Well if theres nothing somwewhere there must be something elsewhere, because otherwise you and I would be made up of nothingness, and that is clearly not the fact.
Now is the universe mental? I assume you mean if our mind defines the universe, than I’d have to say, no. There is a reality, this reality forms us, the viewers, and we viewers view reality, or not, but for the sake of the argument let’s say we do, now we could not have been formed, if reality was mental, because if there was no-one to be mental, than reality could not have been.
I’m becoming something of a materialist in my old age 
To me, idealism - or the idea that the universe is entirely mental, compose of perceptions and ideas - cannot be the whole truth.
Why? Causality. The universe, if we are to make any assumptions about it - seems to be 100% causally determined… at the atomic level and greater at the very least.
Would a universe made of ideas and perceptions be even 1% causally determined?
I’m becoming something of a materialist in my old age
To me, idealism - or the idea that the universe is entirely mental, compose of perceptions and ideas - cannot be the whole truth.
Why? Causality. The universe, if we are to make any assumptions about it - seems to be 100% causally determined… at the atomic level and greater at the very least.
Would a universe made of ideas and perceptions be even 1% causally determined?
“purely mental, I must say”
-Imp
what is amplification in this context? what is an example of a renninger-type experiment?
I’d like to know this too… then I’ll answer the question.
yes
Impious is right to go with Nietzsche here. Not against the “dream” of quantum physics, perhaps, but certainly the dream-reality of quantum metaphysicians.
No, the world is NOT dreamed, and chance spares no one. Not even you.
BUT, causality does not imply materialism, nor does perception imply there “exists” some mental subtstance. Cause is the illusion of illusion. It is the actors or politicians’ motive, it is vapor; in itself, cause has no substance, causality touches nothing. The event which “causes” another is but the trace of its own disappearance. After Deleuze, must we not admit that being is difference? And to make sense of this, we have to relate sense to Events, not to causality–which quantum mechanics in essence replaces with chance.
We exist, survive and make sense of a world which is NOT what we would have imagined given a choice, a world in which our existence has as much sense and meaning as we feel we need to believe in, a world where passive joy is insufficient and we are hungry and craving satisfaction of a kind that no matter could provide; this kind of metaphysical desire is not a lack, but an excess… In this kind of world, we need to learn active joy. But this is a rather obscure point, so let’s just stick with a simple: no. The universe is not just mental (or material, or both.)
To clarify, I wrote the passage quoted, not Nietzsche.
Of course. Definitely some kind of Nietzschean impulse, though, no? At any rate, very good stuff, mate!~