It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by badmedia
What is the special chemical combination that creates consciousness? Where in the universe do we find this "observiminum" element? Is it near the "feelium" element?
I'm not being a smart butt in the above, I realize it can sound like that, but what I am asking is how do you get the feelings and being an observer from chemcials?
Or what electrical signal is the correct one that gives consciousness? etc.
You can talk about how certain areas of the brain cause feelings, how the electrical signals travel through your body to let you know something is touching you. You can talk about how the eyes collect light and turn them into electrical signals that travel to the brain.
But you have said nothing of that which actually observes the image, nothing of that which feels things and so on. If the eyes collect light, turns it into an electrical signal which travels to the back of the brain, and is then converted into the image "you" see, then to what is that image being presented too? Chemcials? and other electrical signals? In which case leads us right back to the start.
What is of the flesh/physical/universe is of that. But that which is spirit, that which observes and feels is eternal and is not of this universe.
Originally posted by OmegaPoint
There's back action, depending on the choice made, which shows that the photon isn't any "thing" until the choice is made, then it actualizes.
The fundamental lesson of Wheeler's delayed choice experiment is that the result depends on whether the experiment is set up to detect waves or particles.
The thing that causes people to argue about when and how the photon learns that the experimental apparatus is in a certain configuration and then changes from wave to particle to fit the demands of the experiment's configuration is the assumption that a photon had some physical form before the astronomers observed it. Either it was a wave or a particle; either it went both ways around the galaxy or only one way. Actually, quantum phenomena are neither waves nor particles but are intrinsically undefined until the moment they are measured. In a sense, the British philosopher Bishop Berkeley was right when he asserted two centuries ago ‘to be is to be perceived’.
What matters isn't which slit it goes through, but whether it manifests as a particle, or a wave, depending on the choice of the observer.