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.
Originally posted by Astyanax
reply to post by VreemdeVlieendeVoorwep
Well, you tried.
Your thread has been ruined by the most obnoxious example of trolling I have ever seen on ATS, and I've been here five years. Sadly, the Ignore button seems to have disappeared, or I for one would have put an end to the annoyance a long time ago.
I'm leaving this thread now, VreemdeVlieendeVoorwep. I advise you, and everyone else who feels as I do, to do the same. Let the Universal Consciousness alone to rave away to itself as it pleases.
'Bye all.
Originally posted by LifeIsEnergy
reply to post by Michael Cecil
I think Micheal did raise a relevant point, where did consciousness come from in regards to the Big Bang theory? Although one may say that consciousness is nothing more than a 'side effect' of evolution, how was 'thought' created out of mere energy and matter?
Originally posted by Michael Cecil
Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
I always imagine the universe as expanding to a "breaking" point, then back to nothing, then bang,"break", bang, "break", bang, etc.
Are you at all aware that this kind of thought merely follows the template set out previously by the 'movement' of self-reflection in the creation of the "self"; that is, the consciousness which exists prior to the consciousness of the 'thinker'?
In other words, the 'movement' of self-reflection instantly creates the 'space' within which the consciousness of the "self" exists as different from both other "selves" and the physical reality; then, that "self" completely collapses once it is consumed in one kind of an experience or another. This alternation of an "inflation" of the conscious 'space' and, then, a "collapse" of the conscious 'space' is then projected upon--and asserted as an explanation for the origin of--the 3-dimensional 'curved' space/time reality.
The 'problem' with the opening passages of the Second Meditation of Descartes is the expression of a fear that the conscious 'space' itself is facing an absolute, timeless, and irrversible annihilation.
This is what the postulation of the thought of the 'thinker' is all about: an escape from the collapse of the conscious 'space' by extending that 'space' in 'time' with the thought of the 'thinker'--which is not capable of collapsing.
Thus, thoughts cannot be synthetically separated from the consciousness in which those thoughts originate.
Michaeledit on 14-10-2010 by Michael Cecil because: clarificationedit on 14-10-2010 by Michael Cecil because: spelling error
Originally posted by GogoVicMorrowYour phrasing "are you at all aware" has an annoying condescending tone.
If you are saying similar theories are common, I'm sure they are. That doesn't change the fact that this is what I imagine. Sorry if that philosophy makes you feel hopeless or something, your distaste for it is obvious
Originally posted by atlasastro
reply to post by andre18
Hawkins Memory-prediction framework is likened to, if not described as, being algorithmic in nature.
Hawkin's also bases the Theory on Bio-Directional hierarchies, that is, the system is two way dependent on a system already developed and operating. The bottom up hierarchy and the top down expectations(from memory).
Also, this theory suggest a COMMON algorithm for the whole system, based on machine learning models.
This begs the question.
Who does the programming.
we can expect them to develop consciousness simply as a side effect of memory prediction, just like you state in your post, that our consciousness is a side effect of memory prediction.
Originally posted by Michael Cecil
Originally posted by GogoVicMorrowYour phrasing "are you at all aware" has an annoying condescending tone.
It was certainly not my intention either to annoy you or to be condescending.
What I was trying to say is "Have you ever heard of any explanation of the origin of that thought?"
That was the meaning "at all aware". Have you ever heard anything like this before?
If you are saying similar theories are common, I'm sure they are. That doesn't change the fact that this is what I imagine. Sorry if that philosophy makes you feel hopeless or something, your distaste for it is obvious
At least some of the background I have on this is from the teaching of J. Krishnamurti who observed that thought often functions to end a discussion rather than to contribute to a discussion.
In other words, people get to a point where they come across the answer which is sufficiently pleasurable to them.
They then consider that answer to be satisfactory and stop investigating any further.
I consider such people as not really being serious at all.
Michael
Originally posted by Freeborn
reply to post by scratchmane
Please explain how time is an illusion.
Originally posted by exmilitaryportuguesenavy
reply to post by VreemdeVlieendeVoorwep
Imagine a black hole, all light energy and matter is sucked in and never left. Now I wonder where he goes all light energy and matter that is sucked into this black hole? probably will accumulate inside of the black hole and going out the other side forming a BIG BANG, I do not know, but this is my theory, our universe emerged from a black hole. Big Bang, Explosion of light what a coincidence isn't it? Sorry for my english