Who observed us into existence?

reply to post by postmeme


I rather doubt I am, arguing with myself I mean. I assume that since I exist and I am pretty sure I do, others must as well. It is possible that I am some sort of mad god dreaming in a void I place it rather low on my list of possibilities.

reply to post by Watcher-In-The-Shadows


Assuming as an individual you are the only one here and this whole universe is in your imagination.

Now ask yourself this question could I be smart enough to have worked all this out?

Just a thought but a thought that indicates to me I am here with others.

MJ2

I once knew someone who always said that "perception is reality".

I really couldn't agree with her more. Each individual perceives his/her reality differently than others in ANY given situation.

That being said (or written as it were), I believe that there ARE higher powers in our universe, not necessarily a 'God', that could have the ability to perceive other worlds, etc (much the same as our sci-fi writers).

If that be the case, then we could be no more than a 'novel', if you will, for other races and societies to behold.

My question is: How does the ending go?

reply to post by Astyanax


That is what I said. I never said anything conscious observed us into play. I merely ask who or WHAT it was that observed our world in such a way that human consciousness evolved.

The post I made on the last page didn't get much attention, but again, think evolutionary non-locality within the framework of a self aware holographic universe - that's what makes the most sense. In other words that meaning, in the form of non-locally distributed information is what makes up reality, and so, what evolved consciousness in the human being was consciousness itself, universal consciousness, and that is the same consciousness which allows the moon to still be there when no one is looking at it.

I like how these self professed smart guys come along and try to claim that consciousness doesn't play a role in quantum mechanics, or how the entanglement issue does not apply at larger scales, as if they are smarter and more learned in these matters than Niels Bohr and the whole group of scientists who came up with the Coppenhagen Interpretation of QM. Their protest is nothing more than a bias against the implications of a type of universal God consciousness generated reality matrix, or what may be thought of a monistic idealism (consciousness is primary). They prefer instead to think of the world in terms of a materialist monism (matter is primary). But that worldview is dead and gone already.

Originally posted by OmegaPoint
You're still not getting the picture. There is no past and no future, only now. And modern science is catching up with that realization as well. Please consider it within the context of Bohm's implicate/explicate order. And consider it logically - where is the past, or the future? There's no such thing. Time is a convention in an attempt to explain causation or change, when in reality, everything is just coming into and passing out of form, and while the configuration changes, the totality remains the same and it's always now. Now that now is now and we're here now, when the dinosaurs roamed the earth, we were also there, in potentia, or in a superdeterministic inevitability, but it's always now, and there was never any time, nor will there every be any time, except now. Time is an illusion.

If time is an illusion, then why am i so skint?

I'm pretty sure i had more money yesterday, but according to your theory time does not exist, then if that's the case.... how the hell do i reach pay day?

Or does form only exist when Bohm says it potentially could not exist due to theoretical instability?

Either way... I'm still skint.

It will still be now on payday, and it's always only now. G, people really ARE locked into timebound consciousness, as if yesterday and tomorrow are REAL. Clock time is just a convention for scheduling purposes, but it's all now, and that's all there ever was, is and will be.

reply to post by Astyanax


Wheeler's delayed choice experiment
www.bottomlayer.com...
has proven that assumption wrong.

Choice is the only thing that collapses the probability wave into an actuality, and so the premise of the OP is sound, since evolution is a chosen path from within a realm of infinite possibility.

IMO God looked into the void and the universe exploded into being...an extrapolation of his divine imagination....and then he looked away.

We are an expression of some omnipotent force which we do not understand. All we can do is look deep within ourselves for some trace or clue as to the motivations or will of creation.

All of the creation myths of the religions of the world ... Desperation for those not comfortable not knowing.

Just my opinion

I think your getting a bit mixed up with quantum physics and normal physics.

The observer effect works at a quantum level. You talking about matter at a higher than quantum level.If you try the double slit experiment with tennis balls and look away the balls dont suddenly start behaving like waves.


[edit on 20-7-2009 by VitalOverdose]

reply to post by majestictwo


You only noticed one part of that didn't you? I said I place that possibility rather low on my list of possibilities, in otherwords not very likely.

reply to post by Mr. Toodles

Assuming this theory is correct, then who observed our world in such a way that Human consciousness evolved?

The one consciousness did, the source, laid the basis for this matrix we have compartementalized ourself in, but that goes way beyond our world.

Both quantum mechanics AND alot of eastern religions say that our reality is only defined by how we observe it. If that was true, then why does our world continue to deteriorate?

Because there are forces that are influencing the way people observe reality.

Originally posted by OmegaPoint
It will still be now on payday, and it's always only now. G, people really ARE locked into timebound consciousness, as if yesterday and tomorrow are REAL. Clock time is just a convention for scheduling purposes, but it's all now, and that's all there ever was, is and will be.

I was being a tad jokey with my post, but you are quite wrong.

You are assuming time is relative only to fixed point of consciousness, and are saying that there is a 'now' followed by a 'now' and then another 'now'.

Those 'nows' are suddenly gone, to be replaced by another 'now'. In in those moment between the previous and the latter you have aged. This suggests a moment.

To look back upon the now previous points of existence, to compare your physical and molecular structure between moments you will notice that things have changed. You have aged.

Time does exist my friend, and you are wrong to assume i believe time is linear. If anything time is circular, with repeating patterns and that is where you are of the belief that everything remains at a constant. Because you fail to notice the transitions between the moments.

The perception of time is relative to the observer, but time exists.

reply to post by OmegaPoint


Actually, it didn't get much attention because you are basing all your arguments on one basic premise.....that time is an illusion. So with that premise as your absolute foundation, the other bricks, if you will, may not in some minds, have substance on which to stand. The very premise itself is strictly conjecture, unproven, philosophical, and highly dubious to those of us who pay mortgages, and do our laundry and buy groceries in anticipation of another day.

I DO understand what you are saying. The present is the only moment in which we exist. Read those philosophies many years ago as an amusement, albeit not nearly so much as you have. That's a given.

My thoughts are that time is spherical, is illlusive, but not an illusion.

But back to the original question: It was a thought. A thought that brought us into existence. Good thread OP, you have such a remarkable mind. I admire it. S&F

Originally posted by ladyinwaiting
reply to post by OmegaPoint

 

Actually, it didn't get much attention because you are basing all your arguments on one basic premise.....that time is an illusion. So with that premise as your absolute foundation, the other bricks, if you will, may not in some minds, have substance on which to stand. The very premise itself is strictly conjecture, unproven, philosophical, and highly dubious to those of us who pay mortgages, and do our laundry and buy groceries in anticipation of another day.

I don't know why but that's hilarious, imho.

reply to post by OmegaPoint


For the record, I never professed to be a "Smart Guy". I never even professed to know more than the guys who made these theories. I am asking questions based on the information I have at hand. Given I have an entire planets worth of information at my fingertips, I believe my questions to be valid.

reply to post by Mr. Toodles


No no I was referring to others who attempt to claim that reality is not consciousness dependant, or that quantum entanglement problem has no bearing on the real world, when things like Bell's Theorem and the Coppenhagen Interpretation of QM sit there, starting them right in the face.

The implications of the truth are absolutely astounding, because it shifts our paradigm from a materialist monist linear time bound causation, to a timeless spaceless eternal now within which everyting is interconnected and interdependant and within which not one part can ever be missing, including our own true self or our most essential observing and aware self, who is not time bound, and who therefore, is eternal, even now in this eternally unfolding present moment.

Modern science may yet save us from a dead materialism, and the sense of separation which is at the root of all our problems, at the sacred place where East and West, Science and Theology, meet and shake hands without any enmity whatsoever.

It seems to me that people are not afraid so much of death, but most of all, of eternal life, or worse, that that eternity is inescapable, right now. The ego-self most certaintly does NOT want to go there, but drag it along and into eternity we MUST, not only for our own sake, but for that of the common good. And when you really think about it, this is the "Great Work" or the Magnum Opus of the ages.

[edit on 21-7-2009 by OmegaPoint]

The Way

perhaps this text will shed some light on your questions.

to each his own

reply to post by OmegaPoint


My apologies. Was not sure who that was directed to anyways, just thought I would make myself clear haha. So far we have had some very interesting answers. I am inclined to believe that time is a subjective function of measurement and that it does exist at some level, but it may not be nearly as profound as most people would see it.

Even if past, present and future breathe as one. From the human perspective, we cannot age without moving from the present to the future. Whether we measure it consciously or not, this will always be the case for mortal beings. As we can see with cockroaches, that are incapable of thought. They grow from babies to full blown, nasty roaches just like everything else.

This is not to say that on some higher existence or dimension that time isn't exactly as you say it is. Non-existent. But I am seeing the logic in a universal consciousness that observed or thought us into existence.

reply to post by Mr. Toodles


I view it simply as something that happens. Not a dimension not a force or whatever the heck else...