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.

 

How Consciousness Becomes the Physical Universe

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 05:54 PM
link   
How Consciousness Becomes the Physical Universe

Abstract


Issues related to consciousness in general and human mental processes in particular remain the most difficult problem in science. Progress has been made through the development of quantum theory, which, unlike classical physics, assigns a fundamental role to the act of observation. To arrive at the most critical aspects of consciousness, such as its characteristics and whether it plays an active role in the universe requires us to follow hopeful developments in the intersection of quantum theory, biology, neuroscience and the philosophy of mind.

Developments in quantum theory aiming to unify all physical processes have opened the door to a profoundly new vision of the cosmos, where observer, observed, and the act of observation are interlocked. This hints at a science of wholeness, going beyond the purely physical emphasis of current science. Studying the universe as a mechanical conglomerate of parts will not solve the problem of consciousness, because in the quantum view, the parts cease to be measureable distinct entities. The interconnectedness of everything is particularly evident in the non-local interactions of the quantum universe. As such, the very large and the very small are also interconnected.


Idealism +1

Parapsychology +1

Materialism -1

Scientism -1

I guess I'm one of the lucky ones...I already knew that matter, energy, time, and space emerge from consciousness. My numerous paranormal / mystical experiences made it very clear to me. Consciousness is primary, matter is secondary. Mental monism, ftw! Maybe we can begin to overcome the crippling materialism that is keeping humanity from reaching its psychic potential. A psychic humanity can conceivably repair all the damage we have done to the planet and to each other, and can't be manipulated by a greedy 1%.


edit on 23-7-2012 by BlueMule because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 06:00 PM
link   
You should look into illuminism.... I have found a grand unified theory of everything that may help explain this... You may be interested.



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 06:02 PM
link   
reply to post by BlueMule
 


I have been participating in a discussion here on the same subject. The implications of Quantum Experiments leave no other option than consciousness. Consciousness has to be influencing particles and the results.

Good luck convincing the skeptics. It doesn't seem to matter how many times you show them the proof.



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 06:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by TraitorKiller
reply to post by BlueMule
 


I have been participating in a discussion here on the same subject. The implications of Quantum Experiments leave no other option than consciousness. Consciousness has to be influencing particles and the results.

Good luck convincing the skeptics. It doesn't seem to matter how many times you show them the proof.



Thanks. But don't call them skeptics. They don't deserve that word. Call them pseudo-skeptics.



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 06:08 PM
link   
Unified theory blows my mind.

We are one =]






posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 06:12 PM
link   
Science: -1
Common-Sense: -1

Pseudo-Science: +1


Chopra also participated in the Channel 4 (UK) documentary The Enemies of Reason, where, when interviewed by scientist Richard Dawkins, he admitted that the term "quantum theory" was being used as a metaphor and that it has little to do with the actual quantum theory in physics.

edit on 23-7-2012 by TheSubversiveOne because: devils advocate



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 06:13 PM
link   
You may find these links of help and interest:

The Genesis Singularity

The Celestial Human



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 06:14 PM
link   
All will eventually come to know their inner creator being, the timeless seer, the Atma. Either through satori in this present life, or through the awakening of physical passing, or through learning in successive lives and successive passings. We eventually all go home to the indivisible source, only at our own pace. The process must proceed by the individual will alone though, so it is difficult to imagine a time on this particular dimensional plane when all souls will be in a unanimous consciousness. Perhaps such consummate unity is reserved for the higher realms of pure thought...perhaps not...we shall see.


And of course, the future is always in flux. Our un-attachment keeps our doors open to infinite potential, the mysterious nature of the absolute.



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 07:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by TraitorKiller
reply to post by BlueMule
 


I have been participating in a discussion here on the same subject. The implications of Quantum Experiments leave no other option than consciousness. Consciousness has to be influencing particles and the results.

Good luck convincing the skeptics. It doesn't seem to matter how many times you show them the proof.



And what proof is this....?

Seriously. Even a defensible logic structure that you can point to that provides an inference scheme that can be proven via direct association with something that a person can acknowledge without having to adopt your view of reality as a whole before any of it makes sense?

So far, none of you have offered anything that doesn't depend on a person's acceptance of faith-based assertions that are founded largely on experiences that you claim to have had. That isn't proof. Not even evidence.

What's the point of declaring that you have "the truth" if you can't tie it directly to what is obvious, widely available to everyone, and as commonplace as molecules of hydrogen? I ask this because if something is the foundation of reality, then it IS as commonplace as hydrogen, painfully obvious, and widely available for anyone and everyone. Hell, that's the DEFINITION of what is foundational. Foundations are omnipresent and pervasive within all structures and - in case you haven't figured it out yet - this material realm is one massive structure (see Sacred Geometry for more on this) The intricate and perfectly symmetrical patterns are indications of the structural basis that gives the material realm its stability and - as a result - its survivability.

Where's the proof that conscious thought is as disciplined, as exact, as mundane, and as deliberately deferential to the material structure and its ongoing survival as it would have to be to be the primordial sub-structure of material existence. Frankly, I don't believe that conscious thought is anything but spontaneous, reactive, responsive, creative and expressive. And that suite of qualities is diametrically opposed to what it takes to maintain and further progress the blisteringly complex matrix of symmetry and interdependence that the material realm displays.

As it seems, conscious thought is only capable of imagining itself to be the Alpha and Omega of physical existence. But then, it's definitely capable of imagination. In fact, it's the only producer of imagination. Everything else simply is what it is. Only conscious thought can pretend to be what it wishes it could be.



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 08:18 PM
link   
You know, it truly is an seemingly impossible task to relate in certain verifiable terms, how consciousness is the driver behind the realms of form. Anything I might offer, you could probably refute by empirical rationality.

Perhaps the interactions at play, between the mental and the physical, are just the same; incredibly complex so as to be incomprehensible through language alone. I know I know, prove it....

Well, I could relate to you how I think that it is sort of a co-evolution between matter and consciousness. That, as the forms mutate and evolve through the ladder of kingdoms; cellular>mineral>plant>animal>'human' and on up, consciousness evolves along with it to accommodate the increasing sensory input. Or does it in fact drive evolution through a sort of "desire"(will?) for increased sense-experience? Again, a subjective conjecture, which would beg the question, "Where does does this desire stem from?"

You could easily refute all of this with empirical rationality, again. Indeed Noreaster, I don't think there is anything I could say on this matter that you could not deny empirically, and that's ok. You'll simply have to find out for yourself, as will I, when the time comes for such answers to be revealed or not revealed, in the path of this personal experience we are having.
edit on 23-7-2012 by Qi Maker because: (no reason given)

edit on 23-7-2012 by Qi Maker because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 12:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by NorEaster
Seriously. Even a defensible logic structure that you can point to that provides an inference scheme that can be proven via direct association with something that a person can acknowledge without having to adopt your view of reality as a whole before any of it makes sense?

So far, none of you have offered anything that doesn't depend on a person's acceptance of faith-based assertions that are founded largely on experiences that you claim to have had. That isn't proof. Not even evidence.

Sayeth the Flatlander asking for proof of the third dimension within 2D constraints.
edit on 2012/7/24 by ErgoTheConfusion because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 12:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by NorEaster
What's the point of declaring that you have "the truth" if you can't tie it directly to what is obvious, widely available to everyone, and as commonplace as molecules of hydrogen? I ask this because if something is the foundation of reality, then it IS as commonplace as hydrogen, painfully obvious, and widely available for anyone and everyone.

Point to consciousness.

You don't seem to disagree with its existence, only the nature of it. It is at least as commonplace as humans, yet you can't point to the consciousness of a human, only the "hydrogen" etc. that make up the visual re-presentation of a human.

When you point to hydrogen, you are pointing to the consciousness of the universe in the same way as when you point to a "human" you are pointing to the consciousness of a human.

It *is* painfully obvious and... heh... available to everyone and anyone by definition. It's the most painfully obvious thing a person can realize, and once done, they wonder how they could have missed it for so long. It's not just staring them in the face, it *is* the face and more.

That's why it's so easy to overlook.

Namaste.
edit on 2012/7/24 by ErgoTheConfusion because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 06:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by ErgoTheConfusion

Originally posted by NorEaster
Seriously. Even a defensible logic structure that you can point to that provides an inference scheme that can be proven via direct association with something that a person can acknowledge without having to adopt your view of reality as a whole before any of it makes sense?

So far, none of you have offered anything that doesn't depend on a person's acceptance of faith-based assertions that are founded largely on experiences that you claim to have had. That isn't proof. Not even evidence.

Sayeth the Flatlander asking for proof of the third dimension within 2D constraints.
edit on 2012/7/24 by ErgoTheConfusion because: (no reason given)


oh snap.


I'll address your next post since it seems to suggest at least an effort on your part to deal with the questions I posed.



posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 07:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by ErgoTheConfusion

Originally posted by NorEaster
What's the point of declaring that you have "the truth" if you can't tie it directly to what is obvious, widely available to everyone, and as commonplace as molecules of hydrogen? I ask this because if something is the foundation of reality, then it IS as commonplace as hydrogen, painfully obvious, and widely available for anyone and everyone.

Point to consciousness.

You don't seem to disagree with its existence, only the nature of it.


I agree that it exists, and I also agree that it does affect the material realm (although, in a much less material sense than some of you seem to want to suggest). My issue has to do with where it shows up in the development chain. My research suggests that it is an epitome development, and not a primordial driver. It also suggests that consciousness is a survival "win", and that it only exists as a result of the material brain (in whatever corporeal structure that brain possesses, of course) and how the brain itself works as a survival system.



It is at least as commonplace as humans, yet you can't point to the consciousness of a human, only the "hydrogen" etc. that make up the visual re-presentation of a human.


In fact, it is exactly as commonplace as humans, and that's the point. Humans are epitome progressive development expressions. They are an amazing confluence of contributing developmental accomplishments, with consciousness the crowning achievement that rises above the rest of what the human being brings to the existential table.


When you point to hydrogen, you are pointing to the consciousness of the universe in the same way as when you point to a "human" you are pointing to the consciousness of a human.


There is no consciousness within a molecule of hydrogen. That's absurd on the face of it. The universe itself has no conscious thought, and to suggest that it does is to redefine what the word consciousness actually means. If you want to discuss the default order and structure that obviously exists within the material realm (and this universe that exists within that realm) then that's a very different discussion. But to insist that order and structure cannot exist without conscious determination is to genuflect to the kind of thinking that has kept religions and superstitions in command of the human mind for the last 6,000 years.

We are coming into a new age, and that sort of mystical, mythical thinking will eventually pass into what will ultimately be seen as an extended gray version of the Dark Ages. Your way of thinking is to be replaced, and it will be replaced. Right now, you're finding yourself doubling down on the mysticisms as this Piscean Age goes through its death throes, and we understand that this is what needs to occur before the sun rises over the Aquarian Age of authentic enlightenment. You see, enlightenment isn't about exclusive knowledge. It's about universal knowledge. Knowledge that does not require faith, or discipline, or dedicated focus on the teachings of any man or "god". It's the open access to the obvious truth that has been cloaked in mystery and allegory and myth and religion for so many thousands of years. The kind of truth that immediately makes logical sense to a person who hasn't needed to meditate for years, or study ancient philosophies, or have out-of-body experiences, or been "born knowing". Universal enlightenment is exactly what it suggests - that the information itself is the breakthrough. Not the capacity of the human minds privileged enough to "get it". That velvet rope routine has been the hallmark of the last 2,000 years, and that age is now sliding off into history.


It *is* painfully obvious and... heh... available to everyone and anyone by definition. It's the most painfully obvious thing a person can realize, and once done, they wonder how they could have missed it for so long. It's not just staring them in the face, it *is* the face and more.

That's why it's so easy to overlook.

Namaste.
edit on 2012/7/24 by ErgoTheConfusion because: (no reason given)


And yet, you Namaste folks are an incredibly tiny minority, even after centuries of aggressive evangelism within arenas where people exist solely to embrace "spiritual" wisdom. So, why is that? Certainly not because your version of truth is so painfully obvious. Hell, you can't even explain the fundamental interconnections it has with what sits right in front of both of our faces right now - the laptop (or desktop) that we use to communicate with one another.

In your version of truth, these things must be seen as illusions. If not, then your version of reality quickly begins to collapse. If even then and now are allowed to exist, your reality is gravely threatened. That's a lot of obviousness that one has to suspend in order to keep from "overlooking".


edit on 7/24/2012 by NorEaster because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 08:11 AM
link   
reply to post by NorEaster
 


What you are saying is somewhat true. I believe that there will be scientific advancements in The Aquarian Age soon, but that science will help us to understand the spiritual.

For example, we believed that we were made from dirt by a perfect humanoid god, now we understand that we are made of atoms / stars / light and at the smallest levels we are connected to everything - which is even more spiritual and it also happens to be truth.

I believe more amazing things like this will be uncovered... Spiritual understanding will no longer be "spiritual" it will have scientific understanding behind it. Energy is a life / animation of its own.

A rock does not have sensation as it does not have a nervous system, but the default is peace /existence.

There is either emotion or just existence (which is equally equated to peace/calmness).

Many people who can feel the energy come to this same conclusion. Even people who do not understand this, but go to nature (park, forrest, etc.) can feel the peace of nature. This is because although there is violent life-forms the energy of trees and plants are surrounding nature which dominates it. Since it does not have (much) sensation naturally it is at peace/calmness/being.


Now I accomplished two goals. I responded to your thought on this "information realm" as you call it, and on my perspective of the original thought of consciousness as it relates to the physical universe.



posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 08:23 AM
link   
Here is how different sacred geometries map the spectrum of consciousness and all domains of reality, including the space-time continuuum predicted by superstring and bosonic string theories:
smphillips.8m.com...

You need to understand that "consciousness" NEVER became the physical universe. Rather, the physical universe is that domain which corresponds to one of the seven principles or modes of consciousness:
1. physical;
2. astral;
3. mental;
4. buddhic;
5. atmic;
6. anupadaka;
7. adi.
The link given above proves mathematically that these seven primary divisions of being are encoded in a recently discovered geometrical structure that is implicit in the Kabbalistic Tree of Life (Otz Chiim) and that the ancient Hebrew Divine Names are potent mathematical prescriptions of both this structure and the sacred geometries of various religions, which are shown to be isomorphic to this amazing map of cosmic reality.



posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 08:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by arpgme

I believe more amazing things like this will be uncovered... Spiritual understanding will no longer be "spiritual" it will have scientific understanding behind it. Energy is a life / animation of its own.


I've noticed a tendency that you seem to think in terms of one half of a truth or one side of a pair of opposites. The other half of the above truth is that scientific understanding will no longer be "scientific", it will have a spiritual understanding behind it. Scientism and hence materialism will be exorcised from science, and out-dated metaphors will be updated in spirituality.


edit on 24-7-2012 by BlueMule because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 08:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by BlueMule

Originally posted by arpgme

I believe more amazing things like this will be uncovered... Spiritual understanding will no longer be "spiritual" it will have scientific understanding behind it. Energy is a life / animation of its own.


I've noticed a tendency that you seem to think in terms of one half of a truth or one side of a pair of opposites. The other half of the above truth is that scientific understanding will no longer be "scientific", it will have a spiritual understanding behind it. Scientism and hence materialism will be exorcised from science, and out-dated metaphors will be updated in spirituality.


edit on 24-7-2012 by BlueMule because: (no reason given)


Science - basically - is a dog chasing Philosophy's car. If it actually caught it, it wouldn't know what to do with it.

Science examines a very tiny slice of reality, and this includes all disciplines of science (cosmology, physics, biology, etc,) I actually like the basic term Metaphysics to describe the extremely broad examination of everything that exists as real - including the created fantasies of the human mind, since they, too, exist once they've been brought into existence by that mind.

I considered coining the phrase macro-physics to represent this specific focus, but that term is already loaded within the academic world, so why bother.

Metaphysics (my own definition, of course) is where it's all headed, and reality will at least be basically understood to be real, objective, and experiencable by the human mind to a level that will give each of us a fighting chance to come to a reasonable understanding of what is real and what is delusion. Of course, the human mind will never be fully capable of accurate determination, but perception has its charms as well.

Just so long as no one loses an eye over all that wonderfully creative fun.
edit on 7/24/2012 by NorEaster because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 09:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by NorEaster
oh snap.


I'll address your next post since it seems to suggest at least an effort on your part to deal with the questions I posed.

Nah, the first response was definitely the more "spot on". But some need the simple to be made complex so we can swing away at it for a long time only to eventually reduce it to its original simplicity and go "Oh! It was so simple all along... and funny!"

/salute
edit on 2012/7/24 by ErgoTheConfusion because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 10:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by NorEaster
Metaphysics (my own definition, of course) is where it's all headed, and reality will at least be basically understood to be real, objective, and experiencable by the human mind to a level that will give each of us a fighting chance to come to a reasonable understanding of what is real and what is delusion. Of course, the human mind will never be fully capable of accurate determination, but perception has its charms as well.

Reality is already basically understood to be real, objective, and experienceable etc. etc.

Just not by all points within the total field at the same time forever, because... well... that's a static existence.

We are chasing our own tail.


Originally posted by NorEaster
We are coming into a new age, and that sort of mystical, mythical thinking will eventually pass into what will ultimately be seen as an extended gray version of the Dark Ages. Your way of thinking is to be replaced, and it will be replaced. Right now, you're finding yourself doubling down on the mysticisms as this Piscean Age goes through its death throes, and we understand that this is what needs to occur before the sun rises over the Aquarian Age of authentic enlightenment. You see, enlightenment isn't about exclusive knowledge. It's about universal knowledge. Knowledge that does not require faith, or discipline, or dedicated focus on the teachings of any man or "god". It's the open access to the obvious truth that has been cloaked in mystery and allegory and myth and religion for so many thousands of years. The kind of truth that immediately makes logical sense to a person who hasn't needed to meditate for years, or study ancient philosophies, or have out-of-body experiences, or been "born knowing". Universal enlightenment is exactly what it suggests - that the information itself is the breakthrough. Not the capacity of the human minds privileged enough to "get it". That velvet rope routine has been the hallmark of the last 2,000 years, and that age is now sliding off into history.

Where on earth do you get the idea I've suggested or encouraged some sort of mystical/mythical exclusivity?

Pointing to 3D for the 2D vantage point to contemplate is far from trying to create a velvet rope. You are creating your own velvet rope by denying what is right in front of you. What is the math (geometry) telling the Flatlanders? What is the math (geometry) telling the Spacelanders? Extrapolate upwards, follow the whirlpools, and voila. It's nothing incomprehensibly magical or exclusive and I will never claim otherwise.

I agree fully that the information is the breakthrough, but sure... keep looking for someone else to attack. Notice in your effort to put someone else in a position of claiming authority, you descend into claiming your own authority yourself.

We are all sharing our vantage points, and some don't shy away from sharing theirs with those who scream "I can't see what you see therefore you must be wrong!"... chuckling at the irony of them denying what they see, blaming them for some supposed claims of "privilege", and then screaming how the 2D view is what's incoming to 3D.

Especially when they also say "I don't want to put in the work you did to see what you see, make it easier for me". You don't get good at mountain climbing by other mountain climbers making it easier to "do" aka "understand". We can only make it easier to watch others doing it. At best a smoother path can be carved, but less is understood about the mountain on that path.

Here is the Mountain: We literally exist at multiple dimensions (or density if you prefer) at all "times" as one cohesive flowing field of energy. That lays the foundation for everything we ever need to know. Now we start figuring out what we're going to do with this information.

No hiding, magic, mystery, privilege, velvet ropes, etc. only recognizing the actual mountain and moving forward on learning how to climb that mountain.

You are right, your view is incoming, and you are right, your perceptions are incomplete. You don't own all cameras taking snapshots of the truth. One person's "magic" and "mysticism" is another person's misunderstood science and (more efficient) poetic scientific descriptions.

/Best Wishes To A Fellow Being (I can alter the wave as many times as you like till you see past the divisive letters of communication and simply reduce to the heart of the communication)
edit on 2012/7/24 by ErgoTheConfusion because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join