Conscious universe getting more support by scientists.

reply to post by Indigo_Child


I was going to jump in but you are making some good points.

The problem for materialist is nobody has ever touched matter. They assume an objective, material reality but this is just wishful thinking.

You would think something like this would be simple. You put on your shoe or grab the remote to change the channel. The truth is nobody has touched matter.

Materialism is a belief system. They say dead matter all of a sudden became aware of itself. They start with this false assumptiom.

The truth is perception creates reality so the universe must perceive itself. The universe is conscious.

See people say the universe can exist without consciousness. This is because they reduce consciousness to the human brain.

Consciousness manifest itself through a phantasm that we perceive as matter.

Originally posted by Psychonaughty
reply to post by 13579

 

I'm sorry 13579, but you sound like a negative entity spreading doom and gloom. You are a citizen of eternity.

"This is why we iterate quite often, when asked for specific information, that it pales to insignificance, just as the grass withers and dies while the love and the light of the One Infinite Creator redounds to the very infinite realms of creation forever and ever, creating and creating itself in perpetuity.

Why then be concerned with the grass that blooms, withers and dies in its season only to grow once again due to the infinite love and light of the One Creator? This is the message we bring. Each entity is only superficially that which blooms and dies. In the deeper sense there is no end to being-ness."

It's the love that keeps us existent indefinitley.

When you fall deep asleep you forget that you were existent before the dream that you experience that is why the dream is so effective. This is EXACTLY what your incarnation is. Your simply in a slumber.

Now back to the thread topic I wrote on a previous page this exact post:

All is one being, all is the One Infinite Creator experiencing and learning of it's infinite self.

That which is infinite cannot be many, for many-ness is a finite concept. To have infinity you must identify or define the infinity as unity; otherwise, the term does not have any referent or meaning. In an Infinite Creator there is only unity. You have seen simple examples of unity. You have seen the prism which shows all colors stemming from the sunlight. This is a simplistic example of unity.


Each creation is another beat of the great central sun (our sun is a sub-sub-sub-sub etc.. version of the great central sun) with new infinite probabilities. Each creation is a break up of unity and eventually unity again, this process continues as an indefinite heart beat. It merely is one beat of the heart of this intelligence from creation to creation.

The galaxy and all other things of material of which you are aware are products of individualized portions of intelligent infinity (Of the original thought or Infinite Creator). As each exploration began (For a galaxy), it, in turn, found its focus and became co-Creator. Using intelligent infinity each portion created an universe and allowing the rhythms of free choice to flow, playing with the infinite spectrum of possibilities, each individualized portion channeled the love/light or light/love into what we might call intelligent energy, thus creating the so-called Natural Laws of any particular universe.

Each universe, in turn, individualized to a focus becoming, in turn, co-Creator and allowing further diversity, thus creating further intelligent energies regularizing or causing Natural Laws to appear in the vibrational patterns of what we would call a solar system. Thus, each solar system has its own, shall I say, local coordinate system of illusory Natural Laws. It shall be understood that any portion, no matter how small, of any density or illusory pattern contains, as in an holographic picture, the One Creator which is infinity. Thus all begins and ends in mystery.

Interesting reads would include:

llresearch.org...

From:

llresearch.org...


Namaste


[edit on 24-12-2009 by Psychonaughty]

I know a lot about the Law of One, but I'm very reluctant in disclosing such ideals this concept bring for some reason.

On topic, many interesting points has been brought up and this is quite a thread to learn from.

Indeed blindly typing would produce chaos. However if yo impose a few rules say you can only hit vowels and a few common consonants and you can't hit the same key repeatedly , you will find i'm sure many words. maybe not classical english lit but words.

Then if you take and make each key a word because the system evolves then you pund away and you get some phrases out of the "chaos".

I can see how imposing a few rules can produce less chaos, but nonetheless still chaos. In composing something like the complete works of shakespeare there is more than just a few rules, there are very complex laws of grammar, metre, poetic devices and creative use of language. If you start to impose rules that accomodate this too then you no longer have an simple set of rules, you have intelligence.

If we consider the human body, it is not just a set of disconnected parts, but an entire system of connected parts which cooperate with each other for even very basic acts like breathing or lifting a finger. This is an infinitely more complex process than the complete works of shakespeare.
If you are saying there are rules that allow this kind of system to evolve, then you are just falling short of saying there is an intelligence that is faciliating this evolution.

Concsious experience is a physical experience. Your perspective gives it its personal meaning and beauty your emotions color your physical experiences. Electrical impulses are a physical phenomenon. Your experiences are a blend of these physical events colored by your emotions and feelings.

This is actually not true. When I experience emotion I feel emotion, I do not experience a physical process of brain chemicals changing. When I think of a beautiful meaningful concept, I think it, I do not experience a physical process of electrical impulses flying. In other words my experience is other than a physical process. You can only state that there are correlations with actual physical processes, but not that it is a causation. It is just as logically possible that the brain is registering chemical changes or electrical impulses, in the same way a radio registers radio signals. Just because the radio signal has correlates in the radio does not mean the radio itself is manufacturing the signal.

Your explanation that my thoughts are electrical signals, or my feelings are chemical changes is dubious, because if that is the case, why am I experiencing something other than this?

This does not mean there is a potential for anything you can imagine. Only things that are allowed by the laws of physics are possible. Some things just lie outside the realm of physical possibility.

No, but there is a potential for consciousness as you conceded yourself earlier. In other words consciousness already exists in a potential domain in reality.

The world was round before we knew it was round. The earth orbited the sun before we knew it. We thought we were the only galaxy before we knew there were more.

Are you telling me the earth was flat before we knew it? Are you saying that the earth was the center of the universe and everything orbited it until we discovered otherwise? Do you believe that the rest of the universe didn't exsist until we built telescopes that could see beyond our galaxy?

No I am not saying any of that. I am saying can you describe the universe without consciousness? What does it look like? What is it? Matter? Nothingness? Potential? It cannot be imagined, because It doesn't really exist without consciousness. To make statements about something when you cannot actually prove it is not valid. You can only continue to believe that it will remain after your consciousness ceases, but not prove it.

As I argued earlier to simply state that reality exists because it existed in the past is an argument based on induction. To state something exists just because it existed in the past, does not mean it will continue to exist in the future. Thus you cannot make certain statements that reality will continue to exist after your conscousness ceases, because you are not around to prove it.

I want to ask another question if you may permit: What are you anyway?

[edit on 24-12-2009 by Indigo_Child]

EEK

I've been doing some reading about the the structure of the universe having some kind of perhaps hidden attributes that would allow for a "cosmic concsiousness".

It's sort of hard to digest the similarity


this is a picture of the universe from a simulation of the universes large scale structure

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/fe71e3124a14.jpg[/atsimg]

now this image is simulation of brain synapses

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/09232174569d.jpg[/atsimg]

. . . . . . perhaps the structure of the universe itself allows for a concsiousness, but then again these are only pictures of simulations

I can see how imposing a few rules can produce less chaos

There is still alot of chaos in the universe. And the entropy of the universe is ever increasing



[edit on 24-12-2009 by constantwonder]

reply to post by Matrix Rising


I agree materialism is a belief system.

Matter and consciousness cannot be reduced to one another. This fact has been known for a very long time in Philosophy.

And it is possible to completely deny manner. Idealism is actually the most consistent, sound and unproblematic philosophy. This has also been well known in philosophy for a long time. The reason materialism gained favour was not because idealism was found lacking, but because materialism was practical and could be exploited to produce technology and profit. Often, you will find it is capitalists that want to maintain materialist thinking.

Materialism is a self-defeating philosophy. It is full of problems.

reply to post by Indigo_Child

I want to ask another question if you may permit: What are you anyway?

I am a meat popsicle

If your asking me what "I" am philisophicaly well. . . .

The holonomic brain theory, originated by psychologist Karl Pribram and initially developed in collaboration with physicist David Bohm, is a model for human cognition that is drastically different from conventionally accepted ideas: Pribram and Bohm posit a model of cognitive function as being guided by a matrix of neurological wave interference patterns situated temporally between holographic Gestalt perception and discrete, affective, quantum vectors derived from reward anticipation potentials

en.wikipedia.org...

[edit on 24-12-2009 by constantwonder]

reply to post by sirnex


I don't understand how you can claim to have consciousness and nothing else that exists can have it. Let me ask you, without consciousness to give perspective to everything, whats the point in coming into existence? To pay bills and live for money and pass away? It seems to me that when you slip consciousness into the equations of life that they actually make more sense, not less. Also, one other thing, why are you defending that consciousness can't have any part in science, when it's part of our every day lives?

Glad to see them finally catching up.

reply to post by GrandKitaro777


Could you please eludicate upon the concepts that you believe to be inadequate. Much appreciated.

As always Namaste brother/sister.

To everyone: You are.... That is all the proof you need.

[edit on 24-12-2009 by Psychonaughty]

reply to post by Indigo_Child

To make statements about something when you cannot actually prove it is not valid.

Awesome, so you now have finally come to the realization that you are an absolute BS artist. It's about time!

You've already openly admitted that you refuse to prove any aspect of your assertions because you can't actually prove them. Thus, they aren't valid and are just wishful thinking born from purposeful ignorance, despite how many time's you call those who continuously disprove your assertions, ignorant.

I thought that Schrödinger presented the thought experiment to highlight absurdity...like Marcel Duchamp`s `fountain`, R.Mutts urinal.?

Protagoras- "Man is the measure of all things" and "Concerning the gods, I have no means of knowing whether they exist or not or of what sort they may be, because of the obscurity of the subject, and the brevity of human life".

rickyrrr hit on this, we are conscious of the limits of our own conscious understanding. We try to remedy this through the most natural of routes, by observing, measuring and formulating questions in a language system...gathering information and showing relationships, that we can work with.
This has been useful in the construction of `things`, our understanding/manipulation of small systems, that offer a relative temporal stability, has benefitted our race (on the whole) and helped to ease the pressing awareness of not been able to comprehend what we are, part of and within.
Science will not cure the `human condition`, but maybe it can give us a feeling of accomplishment and provide some insight into how we can travel across vast distances of space, because we are going to need this technology to ensure the survival of our kind...otherwise all that we are will be lost...and as far as I am aware, our planet is the only known planet supporting life...maybe we are unique.

If this idea of Conscious interaction in the stuff of the universe where true, what would we do with it.? what would you do with it.?

thoughts from a cosmic-teabag.

Originally posted by constantwonder

Originally posted by nunya13
reply to post by constantwonder

 

But aren't the mathematics products of us observing? Or do I have it backwards?

Mathematics are the rules we've discovered that govern things always. Mathematical and physical law are law because they happen everywhere all the time. With or without something there to witness it

How would you know that something happens without being observed?

reply to post by sirnex


thats nice coming from someone who cant even understand probiblity?

And you have not proven me wrong in any of my threads

Funny that aint it?

Back to topic

The universe is consious

You make it so..

reply to post by Jezus


there is always and observer always!

But the point is "being human" "or alive" shall we say is some what different..

As we are made of matter and observing at the same time .. this is how we get reality.

we interact with other "matter" on our scale that results in us seeing "matter" if you was still you and the size of an atom things would loook pretty freaky

reply to post by ironbutterflyrusted

awareness of not been able to comprehend what we are, part of and within.

or ignorance of the facts

here are 2. and i shall say "again"

Your mind has no shape nor does the universe.

the only 2 things that are not possible to mesure

what would be the logical outcome of what we are in ?

reply to post by constantwonder


I am familiar with Pribram holographic model of the brain. He demonstrates that the brain is a holographic system and memory is encoded in every cell and is non-local. However this implies there is another domain other than the brain that stores those memory. So already in this model we are allowing for the possibility of the non-local orign of memories which is not actually in the physical brain.

As as an idealist that works for me. Indeed the memory is non-local because the memories are not actually present in the physical domain. It is not possible to find somebodies memory by looking at the brain, because they do not exist in the physical domain. This does not automatically prove, of course, that they exist in some spiritual domain either, though it certainly lends to the possibility.

It is the case that consciousness and matter occupy different domains. Hence why I never experience electrical signals firing across my synapses, but instead experience thought. And I do a lot of thinking if it is not self-evident already. However, the domain of matter can be denied to leave only the concious domain, because the explanation that the electrical signals IS the thought process is not proven. It contradicts my perception of having thoughts. I am certainly not experiencing electrical signals. It as unfalsifiable to me as religious person telling me that it is spirits causing my thoughts. I have real evidence that I am thinking and it is a qualitative and phenomenological phenomenon.

There is a tradition in Philosophy of Mind today called eliminative materialism which tells us that we are not really thinking, feeling and we are not really aware. That eventually we will find out all phenomenological states are actually brain states, just as we found out before that the earth is orbiting the sun and not vis versa. Of course this is hardly convincing, because there is no logical condition that would allow a consciousness state to be reduced to a physical state. I cannot deny my own thinking, feelings and awareness. That is my direct proof of reality.

Science is just another narrative telling you what reality is. It has no more special status for me than a religious narrative or a political narative. In the end it is my existential truth that overrides all these narratives. The only reality I can be sure of is my phenomenological one which is self-evident to me. I cannot be sure of any other narrative, because they are not self-evident. They are just sombodies take on reality.

So taking my cue from that I base my reality on my experience of it. In my experience reality exists across a spectrum of awareness states dividing into various domains. I thus accept all domains as existent. I know that I am not my body, because the body is something I know as belonging to me. It is therefore only a predicate, and the subject can exist without the predicate. I have direct experience of this because the body I have today is not the body I had when I was 3. I can lose my body and still remain who I am. Thus I am not my body. I am an experiencing thing that is non-physical and my body is a non experiencing thing that is physical. When I depart from the body the body no longer has any life to animate it. It can still exist, but it is dead. Therefore this body is not me.
I am not this mass of flesh, bones, muscles and mucus. It requires me to function. I don't require it to function.

I exist in another domain of reality. I am not of this world. If this is not true then why can't you find me if you look inside my body? Where do I reside in the body? And as the body is constantly in a process of change from birth to death, where could I reside? The brain? It is also changing. In fact you can lose large parts of your brain and still live.

This is what Pribream's research is showing to me. You are non-local. Not actually in this world.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So you are not your body. Then are you your thoughts, personality, egos? Again they are objects of your perception. They too, like the body, are constantly changing, but the nonetheless your sense of self and consciousness endures. They occur to you; you do not occur to them. In other words consciousness is something which is other than bodies, thoughts, personalities, egos etc. So it does not matter how many bodies come and go, how many thoughts come and ago, how many personalities and egos come and go, this consciousness is something that remains. In othe words this consciousness is dependent on nothing and completely unconditioned. It is not in space and time. It is therefore eternal and infinite. It is never born and it is never destroyed.

This entire universe is but a field of awareness of this eternal and infinite conscousness. Therefore the entire universe is consciousness.

If you take a phenomenological standpoint on life you have to conclude that consciousness is infinite and eternal by the logic of it.

I welcome all criticism.

[edit on 25-12-2009 by Indigo_Child]

Originally posted by Indigo_Child
So taking my cue from that I base my reality on my experience of it. In my experience reality exists across a spectrum of awareness states dividing into various domains. I thus accept all domains as existent. I know that I am not my body, because the body is something I know as belonging to me. It is therefore only a predicate, and the subject can exist without the predicate. I have direct experience of this because the body I have today is not the body I had when I was 3. I can lose my body and still remain who I am. Thus I am not my body. I am an experiencing thing that is non-physical and my body is a non experiencing thing that is physical. When I depart from the body the body no longer has any life to animate it. It can still exist, but it is dead. Therefore this body is not me.
I am not this mass of flesh, bones, muscules and mucus.It requires me to function. I don't require it to function.

I completely agree.

Compared to the Universe our entire existence is such a tiny blip in space and time.

I find the idea that each individual complex consciousness is created just to become self aware and disappear forever completely ridiculous.

We are here, we have always been here, we will always be here.

On Narratives:

It is an easy mistake to make to think that science is neutral, faithless, objective etc. This is actually not true. Science is a narrative on reality, just as religion is a narrative on reality or politics is a narrative on reality. Just as there is no universal agreement in religion, or in politics, likewise there is no universal agreement in science either. It is, like religion and politics, full of conflicting perspectives with different models of what the physical universe is and different interpretations of experiments.
There is as much politics in science as there is in religion, as accepting scientific models involves human consensus. Some research will be disregarded because it does not measure up to consensus views or that it does not measure to certain political and economic agendas. Other research will not get funded because the scientific organizion does not want to fund it, even if that research could be beneficial.

Let us take for example Microsoft and its team of developers. Do you know that they deliberately introduce bugs into their software, so that they can get you to buy more software with lesser bugs(and newer bugs) It is the same in all technology in the world. There is a negotiation process between companies, research and development and the manufacturers before any technology is developed in order to suit corporate agendas.

So people don't make the mistake of thinking science is objective, faithless and neutral. It is just as dubious as is religion and politics. It has no more special status than these. It is just another narrative.

Who has actually seen an electron? lol

[edit on 25-12-2009 by Indigo_Child]

reply to post by Indigo_Child

As as an idealist that works for me. Indeed the memory is non-local because the memories are not actually present in the physical domain.

Well its both non local and local

Brain > Memory > Brain

In order to obtain memory would reqire a Brain first and for most.. they are interactions between you and matter then they are "held" inside your "doors" shall we say to be called upon when needed.. when you forget a meory it is not "forgoten" you just are not opening the right "door" to the information being held behind it.

The body is a machine just like a computer based on rules very simple ones "thats why the matrix was so popular" because it shows the symmerty of humans with our own logical based system we call the computer..

The reason computers work like us is because of us.. that is the way we was programmed to work so that is how we would create our own "AI" but the flaw in AI is that we dont understand what we ARE yet.

This is the missing link they are trying to find.. we can never make intelegence because we can not figure out if we are infact intelgent our self..

that comes again to the subject we are on "what is consciousness?" is it just the bi product of a function or is it a gift of a "spirit" that god created "whatever god"?

and if we are just a "function" just like the electron then the outcome of that would be the universe its self is aware in some way.. why?

well if no living beings were here and we claim to be "conscious" then the universe all ready is? because the universe created us? we did not create IT did we?

So the answer is a basic YES.. no matter how you wish to play with words its a simple aspect of 2 sides of the same coin

observation and logic both work well when dealing with unfathermble questions..

what is infinity?

well infinity is a relfection "or can be" and the only reason we know its real is because we are alive.

infinty stops when you die.. thats a fact "for now" unless someone who is dead can come back and tell me otherwise

The universe is not infinate "according to the big bang theory" but yet being inside of it produces this problem?

why is that?

WHY

reply to post by Jezus

Compared to the Universe our entire existence is such a tiny blip in space and time. I find the idea that each individual complex consciousness is created just to become self aware and disappear forever completely ridiculous.

Let me point out something here.. that a lot of people MISS.

You was created by something resulting in a universe "as we know it"
You say your existence is a "tiny blip" when in fact its not its infinant.

Once you are the observer in the universe "as a living being" you live for infinity... to me your life may be short of that of a nats.. but once you are aware of you "self" you have to have humilty at the awesomeness of being here and the wasted time humans have spent pissing up a wall..

we see life as a given.. just like saying we will always be here..

This is were you fail to grasp DEATH.. and you do DIE my friend there is no OTHER LIFE after death.. you become the system that created YOU.. you get a NEW JOB

and that job is to create LIFE..

YIN AND YANG

LIFE AND DEATH

so for all you "spirt people" when your dead dont worry because you wont miss being alive..

and make sure when you are about to hit the big black nothing take this with you.

You made the universe WORK.. as you are a function of it and for ever will be "not as a living person" but as matter and engery

for both can not be destroyed. one of the same thing .. just like you and this pretty uinverse and there is more than ONE