It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Science tells us matter doesn't exist

page: 5
7
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 24 2009 @ 05:18 PM
link   
Sounds a little like the tree of knowledge in the garden of Eden, knowledge openned their eyes and they saw they were naked. Kind of that awarness of the world around them and they felt ashamed of their bodies.
It just goes to show that maybe the universe is a design in which we live in through creation and that is why UFO's and paranormal activities happen all the time because its just on the boarder.

[edit on 24-4-2009 by The time lord]




posted on Apr, 24 2009 @ 05:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by platosallegory
What's our perception connected to?

Our observation brings matter into existence. This is what's shown by science through things like the double slit experiment.


Our perception is connected to our observation. We observe and there fore we percieve it.

The question should be what variable in our observation determines how we perceive something.



posted on Apr, 24 2009 @ 06:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by platosallegory
This is science not the wishful thinking of materialist.

Materialist tells us that things like life and consciousness are a secondary function of matter but the materialist has not proven scientifically that matter has an objective existence beyond our perception of it.

What we know is that matter doesn't exist absent observation.

We also know that information contained in any region of space is not found in it's volume but on a 2-D surface or boundary. So volume is an illusion.

The laws of physics are not found out their but they depend on our perception and observation. The laws of physics are found on a 2-D surface area not in 3-D space. So the question is, where does our perception come from? What's our perception connected to?

Our observation brings matter into existence. This is what's shown by science through things like the double slit experiment.

We don't have any observed evidence that matter can exist absent our observation.

So I want a materialist to scientifically prove that matter exists beyond our perception of it.

[edit on 21-4-2009 by platosallegory]


No, you have it wrong. When we are talking about observers in the double slit experiment, we mean photons.

You can't prove that matter exists, as philosophers have already proven.



posted on Apr, 24 2009 @ 06:43 PM
link   
reply to post by elfie
 


Good points.

The fact is, this is science and all the rest is science-fiction.

The materialist hates choice but choice creates reality. This is what the double slit, delayed choice and quantum eraser experiments show.

It's like you have 3 options when you wake up:

watch news
eat breakfast
go to the Bahamas

Going to the Bahamas is the least likely option but say a travel agent friend of mine calls and he has tickets to the Bahamas. He wants to go down there and party with some females.

Now the observer is again presented with option and the "choice" that I make will determine which path that I take.

If I take choice A - I end up going to the Bahamas with my friend and meet some beautiful women.

If I take choice B - I decide to stay home because I'm not feeling good. I end up cutting my foot on some glass then go to the hospital. After leaving the hospital I play a lottery number that I saw at the hospital and I hit the number for $20,000.

So the choice of the observer determines what path will be taken. This destroys materialism.

So all that we can say exists based on experiments is an undefined observer that makes choices. This is what materialist hate because it sounds too much like God.



posted on Apr, 24 2009 @ 08:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by perceived perception
This topic sounds a lot like "The Self Aware Universe" in a nutshell.

This is serious stuff, coz by the OP proposition, things that you don't see may not exist, and it means that partial obscurity may redefine an object. Let me demonstrate using your sentence:

"This topic sounds a lot like -------------------------nuts----"

I guess that the back door to the new scientific field of partilization has been crack opened.




posted on Apr, 24 2009 @ 10:30 PM
link   
Prove something exists outside the human experience? I'm human. I can't do that. For that matter nor can any other human. What about looking into a telescope millions of years into the past. Certainly the age of that information is a lot older than humans and was therefore existing before we observed it.



posted on Apr, 24 2009 @ 10:48 PM
link   
really though it doesnt matter if matter exsists or not. this is as real as it gets for us this is the reality we can percieve and were tethered to our reality.

What does matter is that we do exsist here now and nothing in the universe matters without a consious being to behold its beauty. Its called anthropic reasoning and its a philosophy that eases my mind when dealing with tough seemingly paradoxical questiions.

Beauty complexity simplicity here there everything is meaningless without us to. There is no how without there first being a who

but it is philosophy so take from it what you will




posted on Apr, 25 2009 @ 03:19 AM
link   
reply to post by platosallegory
 


See Quest is debating measurement but I'm talking about choice.

So, you can choose which slit the particle goes through?

Fiddlesticks.

Choice isn't choice unless you can will the outcome. And you can't, not in any of these experiments you so misunderstand.



posted on Apr, 25 2009 @ 04:36 AM
link   
There is no spoon



posted on Apr, 25 2009 @ 04:53 AM
link   
reply to post by platosallegory
 


damn man i thought i knew it all ,but this is some # ...



posted on Apr, 25 2009 @ 06:07 PM
link   
So does science have limitations? This is perhaps the more important question to ask.

If it does, then what other tools are necessary to understand the universe?

I like this thread, but then again, I like to really think outside the box.


There is "my" reality.
There is "your" reality.
Then there is the "way it really is."

Perception is everything in our world, but unfortunately it doesn't always translate to reality.

Is there a gray existence in observations? Might one person "see" something I don't see, yet both of us are looking? For something to be real, must it be observed by all to have credence? Or may something be real with limited observers?

Through what "eyes" are we observing? Do our eyes view through any filters? Can these filters ever be biased?

I am not a scientist in the traditional sense, but see the necessity of incorporating the spiritual aspects of the universe to gain greater insight that traditional science is incapable of. So I need to accept on some level what is being taught by the leading scientists as I am not in their labs. I have no problem doing so. I also have no problem in recognizing their limitations and acknowledging my strengths in what lies beyond. Hence, calling myself a spiritual scientist.

It is ironic that we cannot often give credence to those whose fields are different than our own and then disavow the observations of others because it doesn't work with our filters!



posted on Apr, 27 2009 @ 09:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by masterp
You can't prove that matter exists, as philosophers have already proven.



I find this hysterical!
By a philosophers own admission they don't exist either. So whatever proof they've proven isn't proven at all!
LOL

I'll stick with my answer. It does and it doesn't. Or better yet. Matter doesn't care what you think.



posted on Apr, 27 2009 @ 09:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by Grimstad
There is no spoon


Then you will see, it is not the spoon that bends, it is only yourself.

I love this quote. And it's so true.
Sometimes in order to change reality we must first change ourselves or our way of thinking.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join