There Is No Such Thing As Non-Physical Reality!

reply to post by NorEaster


"I think that people get a bit confused concerning the term physical, and limit it to only describe material existence"

anything that exists has to physically exist or materially exist,,,, because in order for "something" (anything) to exist it must be composed of "something" ( it must take up space),,, if it is not composed of something or does not take up space ( what and where is it?) it is equal to our concept of nothing or no thing,, which does not exist by its own definition for all things that exist are composed of something and take up space and exist.......

this is a problem i have with the physics heads talking about outer space and if it is infinite and physically existing or if it is the lack of things,, or if it exists beyond this physical and spatial universe....

reply to post by TheJourney


OK, I'm going to shoot from the hip here real quickly before I read through.

What about the past? Is it not reality? It is no longer "physical," but it is reality isn't it?

What about a concept such as love? Hate? A story? A memory?

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by TheJourney

 

What about the past? Is it not reality? It is no longer "physical," but it is reality isn't it?

What about a concept such as love? Hate? A story? A memory?

right now,,,, where is this past you speak of? can you only describe it in physical terms? can you only prove it once physically existed in physical terms ( such as a photo, or story)?

Describe love and let me know if the concept of love depends on anything physical to exist?

what is a memory a memory of? where is a memory stored? is the activity of perceiving or viewing a memory a physical activity?

reply to post by ImaFungi


I could describe it mathematically, but it wouldn't be very useful in here. We could take all of known existence, and then we could define parameters in a 4 coordinate system, and we could assign a 4 place marker for each event in history, and it would be a physical representation of physical spot in time.

Or, you said "non-physical reality." So, isn't a memory a reality? Isn't an emotion a reality? I suppose you could describe the emotion with chemistry, or describe the memory with thorough research in physical synapses in the brain, but is that any more "real" than anything else? I mean the concept of placing a complicated memory, complete with emotion, smell, and imagery all into a brain synapse is not really a "physical" representation of a reality, yet it is real.

What about the pure creative thought? It doesn't immediately exist in a synapse, perhaps it exists in the mind's eye, but then it is able to go from imagination to physical existence by the hands of an artist. Isn't that a "non-physical reality" up until it becomes a physical reality?

reply to post by getreadyalready


"I could describe it mathematically, but it wouldn't be very useful in here. We could take all of known existence, and then we could define parameters in a 4 coordinate system, and we could assign a 4 place marker for each event in history, and it would be a physical representation of physical spot in time. "

ok but does the past you are describing physically exist right now?
is the only reason you are able to describe the past because it once existed physically?
is the method you use to describe the past your memory?
is your memory a physical mechanism?
your memory is created by your senses and physical external reality,,, your senses sense physical information and process it to make sense of physical external reality ,,


"Or, you said "non-physical reality." So, isn't a memory a reality? Isn't an emotion a reality? I suppose you could describe the emotion with chemistry, or describe the memory with thorough research in physical synapses in the brain, but is that any more "real" than anything else? I mean the concept of placing a complicated memory, complete with emotion, smell, and imagery all into a brain synapse is not really a "physical" representation of a reality, yet it is real. "

you say "is that any more real than anything else",,, what does that mean? im saying everything that exists,, exists physically and therefore is just as "real" as anything else that physically exists.,.,. an insect physically exists and consists of exactly what it does,, same for a star,,, same for the human brain,,, same for the parts of a computer and memory storage components,,,,,
the memory complete with emotion, smell, imagery is able to exist and be accessed in the mind via physical process,,, the brain synapse is whats physical,,, everything about it no matter how tiny,, does physically exist in the totality of reality,,.,.,.,. the memory is like the different between a map and the actual world,,,, its a representation,,, in a way that language, code or information symbolizes or represents complex ideas and concepts,,.,. what it comes down to for me is,,,,,, your saying its not really "physical" then define what it is,, and how something that is not physical can interact with something that is physical,, if it is not physical what is it composed of?

reply to post by TheJourney


Of course you realize you are speaking strictly of your own limitations and finite nature.
No one expects you to grasp what is beyond your reach, and this is for the best as you are obviously lost with what little is on your plate.

Be forewarned, attempts to impose your inadequacies on others will backfire.
Even here.

reply to post by Star128


he merely is stating everything that exists must in some form exist physically,,,,, so when you say


"No one expects you to grasp what is beyond your reach,"

if you believe there exists a thing which you exclaim he does not grasp,,,, that thing which he fails to grasp is a graspable thing, therefore physical?
that is all he has exclaimed,,,,

this is different then saying imagine what is going on to the T of truth on a planet we cannot perceive right now,,, we can not grasp the truth of these answers though the truth and answers do exist as truth and reality,,,,, but these still are all examples of measurable physical phenomena,.,,

"There is no such thing as non physical reality",,,,, was the statement

what is your theory on why that statement is false?

Originally posted by TheJourney
You heard it right! I am sorry to disappoint all you spiritual people out there. Everything is physical! There is no such thing as transcendence of physicality. What we call spiritual existence, or higher planes of reality, are simply more complex, and more subtle, levels of physical reality.

Your thoughts, your dreams, are physical phenomena. I cannot claim to accurately describe the exact mechanisms behind the physical reality of thoughts and dreams. Let me just propose one possible degree of extreme subtlety, to help you conceptualize. Suppose that thoughts, and mental images such as those in dreams, create a disturbance at the atomic level. As you think things, and your emotion changes, there are changes to your atomic configuration. You can see how at least this level of change must occur.

If you consider that, not to mention changes at a neural level, which is a much larger scale, then let us think of the implications. Your conceptualization of this is probably under the particle interpretation of reality, yet there is a wave-particle duality to take into account. Physical reality is really both wave and particle, depending on how you look at it. If we consider the alteration at the atomic level previously spoken of in wave-form, the implications become more clear. With your thoughts, there is a shift in atomic structure, which in this case means a shift in its wave-form. This wave-form is not limited in space, and so simply spreads out with the energy all-around it, causing an alteration in the wave-forms of everything. This implies a level of reality where thoughts, and other phenomena we consider to be 'non-physical' take place.

The acute reader will understand the implications, and will likely associate this with the law of attraction. That is correct, upon analysis you can see this as a working mechanism behind the law of attraction. Once we have established some of the implications of what I am saying, which may have at first seemed anti-spiritual and materialistic, I will have to now apologize to the materialist. What I am speaking of is, in a way, very strict materialism, but this mode of thought followed to its end leads to what has been called spiritual, though is not truly non-physical. What I am speaking of is physcal in the strict sense, relativistic, quantum, uncertain. An update to our understanding of what 'physical' actually means demonstrates no contradiction between the physical reality of materialists and the transcendental realities of the spiritualists.

edit on 30-7-2012 by TheJourney because: (no reason given)

edit on 30-7-2012 by TheJourney because: (no reason given)

when you go to sleep and you dream? you encounter many ppl there have conversations etc. you might be in a party.. a club a bar a meeting or on the beach.

tell me.. how do u fit all these physical things into your head. ur head must be extremely large! (pun intended)

reply to post by 0mage


how do you fit everything youve ever done on your computer,, in a micro chip? your micro chip must be large? (oxymoron intended) ((actualmoron offended?)

reply to post by ImaFungi


and you think a computer is somehow comparable to a man in terms of levels of conception? u do recognize how inferior a computer is to a human. dont worry.. dont answer that.. u obviously do not have this recognition.

considering our belief systems are what make us i suppose it's just as well that some ppl dont believe in more than physical reality.. maybe it's a good thing you dont believe..

offended? not in the slightlest. to me your statement is wrought of ignorance. an ignorance i have no problem in letting u live. when ur sooo sure.. well ill let life teach u differently. perhaps only in death. so go ahead.. keep on believing that when you die your existence is wiped out without a trace in any other universe/dimension. go ahead.. it really doesnt affect me if u kill ur own spirit. ur also probably gay. but dont answer that either.

so mote it be.. ciao

Do you not think the brain is capable of conceiving of people and events? Does perception and memory not coincide with the nervous system?

Originally posted by 0mage
reply to post by ImaFungi

 

and you think a computer is somehow comparable to a man in terms of levels of conception? u do recognize how inferior a computer is to a human. dont worry.. dont answer that.. u obviously do not have this recognition.

considering our belief systems are what make us i suppose it's just as well that some ppl dont believe in more than physical reality.. maybe it's a good thing you dont believe..

offended? not in the slightlest. to me your statement is wrought of ignorance. an ignorance i have no problem in letting u live. when ur sooo sure.. well ill let life teach u differently. perhaps only in death. so go ahead.. keep on believing that when you die your existence is wiped out without a trace in any other universe/dimension. go ahead.. it really doesnt affect me if u kill ur own spirit. ur also probably gay. but dont answer that either.

so mote it be.. ciao

Ill be looking for you in the after life and the astral plane,,, finna make you my boy toy

Originally posted by ImaFungi
reply to post by NorEaster

 

"I think that people get a bit confused concerning the term physical, and limit it to only describe material existence"

anything that exists has to physically exist or materially exist,,,, because in order for "something" (anything) to exist it must be composed of "something" ( it must take up space),,, if it is not composed of something or does not take up space ( what and where is it?) it is equal to our concept of nothing or no thing,, which does not exist by its own definition for all things that exist are composed of something and take up space and exist.......

this is a problem i have with the physics heads talking about outer space and if it is infinite and physically existing or if it is the lack of things,, or if it exists beyond this physical and spatial universe....

edit on 31-7-2012 by ImaFungi because: (no reason given)

this is the flaw of man's logic.

everything u can touch and see.. a wall for example is made out of atoms.. and atoms are made out of empty space and filled with empty space. explain to me again how something cant come from nothing when the something u speak about is actually made out of nothing. no wires, no chips and ic's no circuits, no boundary.. yet.. these atoms take shape.

if u cant see that in light of this information ive given u then u are beyond all hope imo.

better yet.. explain to me how an atom is made and what causes it to take shape.

Originally posted by 0mage

everything u can touch and see.. a wall for example is made out of atoms.. and atoms are made out of empty space and filled with empty space. explain to me again how something cant come from nothing when the something u speak about is actually made out of nothing. no wires, no chips and ic's no circuits, no boundary.. yet.. these atoms take shape.

if u cant see that in light of this information ive given u then u are beyond all hope imo.

better yet.. explain to me how an atom is made and what causes it to take shape.

edit on 22-8-2012 by 0mage because: (no reason given)

The atom is a basic unit of matter that consists of a dense central nucleus surrounded by a cloud of negatively charged electrons. The atomic nucleus contains a mix of positively charged protons and electrically neutral neutrons (except in the case of hydrogen-1, which is the only stable nuclide with no neutrons). The electrons of an atom are bound to the nucleus by the electromagnetic force. Likewise, a group of atoms can remain bound to each other, forming a molecule.

en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by TheJourney

The reason there can never be a genuine oneness is because the honest truth is our universe is an experiment. Things are separated so that the failure of one component won't ruin the entire experiment. There might be bits of oneness present in the system to exploit what works to its fullest, but there's no complete oneness. Complete oneness would mean that we're all a single consciousness and that any failure of this consciousness would be fatal for the entire universe.

By separating complete consciousness into smaller elements, failure can be isolated.

Basically, the things in our universe operate on the principle of brute force intelligence. Through trial and error the universe has learned what works and what doesn't. It's not self-aware of its own learning, but by virtue of the fact that what works survives, the universe adopts new information. This information is channeled through us; the fractional intelligences. We're its application.

I really think the origins of intelligence can be partly learned in cell simulations.

The best I think we can hope for - as far as immortality is concerned - is that we're indeed part of someone else's simulation. This ensures that the memory of life can be partially recorded.

But what if there's no creator being? And what if there's no reliable method to distinguish between a simulated reality and a genuine naturally created reality? What if they're identical? The only difference between them is that in one a creator being is observing it and in the other nothing is?

The very first living organism had to fulfill certain criteria to survive. How they're fulfilled was probably trial and error. I wager that many unrealized life-forms perished before they could ever come into being. This is because their methods to meet the necessary criteria failed. They were lost to history. I also contend that our understand of life's origins is incomplete on many orders of magnitude. Somehow there were many more chances for life to arise and evolve than we're presently aware of.

Originally posted by LesMisanthrope

Originally posted by 0mage

everything u can touch and see.. a wall for example is made out of atoms.. and atoms are made out of empty space and filled with empty space. explain to me again how something cant come from nothing when the something u speak about is actually made out of nothing. no wires, no chips and ic's no circuits, no boundary.. yet.. these atoms take shape.

if u cant see that in light of this information ive given u then u are beyond all hope imo.

better yet.. explain to me how an atom is made and what causes it to take shape.

edit on 22-8-2012 by 0mage because: (no reason given)

The atom is a basic unit of matter that consists of a dense central nucleus surrounded by a cloud of negatively charged electrons. The atomic nucleus contains a mix of positively charged protons and electrically neutral neutrons (except in the case of hydrogen-1, which is the only stable nuclide with no neutrons). The electrons of an atom are bound to the nucleus by the electromagnetic force. Likewise, a group of atoms can remain bound to each other, forming a molecule.

en.wikipedia.org...

HAHAHA.. NO! this is the same thing we came across when i asked the scientists in the scientific forum to describe to me what makes pressure operate.

i did not ask for how the atom is made up, i didnt ask for the names of it's parts.

i want "the process of how to make an atom from scratch"

that's right.. no quick mix pack available.

i will give u one element... light. and i want u to make an atom from it. tell me how u would go about constructing said atom. ill make it easy.. a hydrogen atom LOL

Originally posted by 0mage

Originally posted by LesMisanthrope

Originally posted by 0mage

everything u can touch and see.. a wall for example is made out of atoms.. and atoms are made out of empty space and filled with empty space. explain to me again how something cant come from nothing when the something u speak about is actually made out of nothing. no wires, no chips and ic's no circuits, no boundary.. yet.. these atoms take shape.

if u cant see that in light of this information ive given u then u are beyond all hope imo.

better yet.. explain to me how an atom is made and what causes it to take shape.

edit on 22-8-2012 by 0mage because: (no reason given)

The atom is a basic unit of matter that consists of a dense central nucleus surrounded by a cloud of negatively charged electrons. The atomic nucleus contains a mix of positively charged protons and electrically neutral neutrons (except in the case of hydrogen-1, which is the only stable nuclide with no neutrons). The electrons of an atom are bound to the nucleus by the electromagnetic force. Likewise, a group of atoms can remain bound to each other, forming a molecule.

en.wikipedia.org...

HAHAHA.. NO! this is the same thing we came across when i asked the scientists in the scientific forum to describe to me what makes pressure operate.

i did not ask for how the atom is made up, i didnt ask for the names of it's parts.

i want "the process of how to make an atom from scratch"

that's right.. no quick mix pack available.

i will give u one element... light. and i want u to make an atom from it. tell me how u would go about constructing said atom. ill make it easy.. a hydrogen atom LOL

I think sciences best guess,, is that hydrogen atoms were formed in the big bang,,, and then the hydrogen universe turned into stars,, and then inside stars through nuclear fusion,, hydrogen atoms are used to create heavier elements,,,. and those elements created in stars now make up the universe along with the original hydrogen atoms..

reply to post by 0mage


This is what I was replying to:

and atoms are made out of empty space and filled with empty space. explain to me again how something cant come from nothing when the something u speak about is actually made out of nothing. no wires, no chips and ic's no circuits, no boundary.. yet.. these atoms take shape.

reply to post by ImaFungi


i dont know what kind of man/woman are you if that answer is satisfactory.

how to make pancakes from scratch??
ohh you just buy the pancake mix and follow the instructions on the box LOL