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 NorEaster
Originally posted by Itisnowagain
reply to post by NorEaster
You really should watch and follow along with the video but if you did it would change your belief so I doubt you will. I would rather forget belief and have truth instead.
The mind is experienced as thoughts and ideas and beliefs and concepts, projection in time - past/future - personality.
What do you experience as 'mind'?edit on 25-4-2013 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)
Look. You embrace what you feel good about embracing. It's not my wish to dissuade you from embracing the reality view that best suits you, and my concern isn't for those who've found their faith-based community. My concern is for the folks who don't realize how deeply affected they have been by the social conditioning, and have no idea how vulnerable they'll be when they discover that their disbelief in an afterlife won't prevent that afterlife from being a reality for them.
I won't address semantics...
...but you did toss in a few important points about consciousness that can be addressed by the concept of the "Emergent System".
Screw reductionism. This 2013, not 1913. Strict reductionism didn't survive the 20th century.
Originally posted by WanDash
Originally posted by NorEaster
...This is the point of this thread. To open up a discussion about what's actually happening here on this planet, and perhaps on all other planets where human generating material brains exist. My ultimate effort is to educate people and give them the option of embracing these traditional notions or not. I just feel that all human beings should have the freedom and autonomy that they're physically capable of having. Then, if they want to join a specific community of humans as a result of agreeing with them and seeing the value in being a member of said community, they are free to join it and enjoy that community. As it stands, this isn't how community assignment is being handled once the human being emerges from this material realm.
Of course, I'm the clown...but I am totally enthralled with your proposition.
So - Where do I sign up?
Your suggestion (don't know why it would be considered far-fetched) that "this life" is a gestational process for an "after-life" is certainly NOT in opposition to most religious suppositions.
I would love to have more insight into how you came to the brink of this...uhhhhhh...paradigm?
Sorry I don't have much to offer...yet... Hope to...before you've lost interest!!!!!
Thanks for all your work in putting this out for consideration.
Originally posted by elysiumfire
Continued from my earlier post...
As a particle, the quantum vibrates about its own center at a velocity termed its rest phase, its lowest energy state. In this phase, the particle can be said to be uncoupled (non-interactive) from its environment and other particles nearby, this is its waveform. The quantum is also said to have a field of influence, the boundary of limit of its motion about its center. There are other particles nearby, equally uncoupled from their environment and each other, that is until an energy wave propagates through their region.
To illustrate this think of a small region of a beach. Along the shoreline a number of people (particles) stand fidgeting, but not moving from their position. They are positioned in a block of 10 people by 10 people, and are just about out of arm and leg reach of each other. These people cannot perceive each other in any way, even though they may only be a few feet from each other. They just stand there fidgeting incessantly at a particular unvarying rate. Suddenly, a wave of water (a propagated wave of kinetic energy) rushes in onto the beach and washes over the feet of the line of people closest to the waters edge. These people now react to the wave and are excited out of their rest phases and quickly move in the direction the wave is going. This makes them collide with the people behind them, which in turn brings them out of their rest phases, causing them to move in the same direction, equally colliding with the people behind them, and so on.
In quantum terms a number of effects arise:
1) the kinectic energy wave raises the quantum out of rest phase and excites it to an higher energy level.
2) each quantum has an upper energy threshold, above which it must emit excess energy in the form of a lepton; each particle seeks to return to rest phase.
3) as the kinectic energy wave forces the particles towards each other, they correspond through their quantum fields, which breaks down their waveforms, they instantly perceive each other.
4) it is from out of this correspondence that the energy that places organisms into the conscious state arises.
When quanta correspond with each other, a resonance arises that is the sum of their correspondence, that is to say, each quantum's intrinsic energy value and the value of the kinectic energy wave, bring forth an informational resonance. This resonance is the energy that is responsible for the conscious state, and lasts only as long as the correspondence. When the kinetic energy wave passes, each quantum returns to their rest phase, and the correspondence between them ceases, and the resonance fades. All this happens within an instant, which makes the conscious state an 'on/off' switching sequence, but because other kinetic energy waves are following on the heels of the first kinetic energy wave, the quanta are constantly switched on and off to their correspondence.
quan·tum [kwon-tuhm] noun, plural quan·ta [-tuh]
1. quantity or amount: the least quantum of evidence.
2. a particular amount.
3. a share or portion.
4. a large quantity; bulk.
Originally posted by elysiumfire
Screw reductionism. This 2013, not 1913. Strict reductionism didn't survive the 20th century.
Wrong. Reductive reasoning is alive and well in the 21st century. It is an everday habit which everybody uses daily when weighing up choices. Why deny what you yourself use in your postings?edit on 26/4/13 by elysiumfire because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Itisnowagain
Originally posted by NorEaster
Originally posted by Itisnowagain
reply to post by NorEaster
You really should watch and follow along with the video but if you did it would change your belief so I doubt you will. I would rather forget belief and have truth instead.
The mind is experienced as thoughts and ideas and beliefs and concepts, projection in time - past/future - personality.
What do you experience as 'mind'?edit on 25-4-2013 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)
Look. You embrace what you feel good about embracing. It's not my wish to dissuade you from embracing the reality view that best suits you, and my concern isn't for those who've found their faith-based community. My concern is for the folks who don't realize how deeply affected they have been by the social conditioning, and have no idea how vulnerable they'll be when they discover that their disbelief in an afterlife won't prevent that afterlife from being a reality for them.
That is my mission too.
The 'mind' is 'social conditioning' - it is not what you are.
If you hold fast onto the conditioning (mind) you may well find that you carry it with you forever - eternal suffering. If you discover that you are prior to the mind and find your true nature - the suffering will end.edit on 26-4-2013 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)
The quantum is not a particle or an anything other than the indivisible unit of whatever it is that's being examined - such as transfer of energy, raw activity, presence.
Your analogy is in need of an alternate substruction.
Your own stated embrace of the emergent system as an physical manifestation proves that you agree with me. I don't understand the conflict here.
My efforts are to prove the definite plausibility of human conscious existence beyond the death of the brain, and that this survival has nothing at all to do with the existence of God, a god, or any version of primordial consciousness. In fact, I work to prove that such a primordial consciousness cannot possibly exist, and that consciousness itself is a capacity that is apical and not primordial.
Originally posted by NorEaster
...My efforts are to prove the definite plausibility of human conscious existence beyond the death of the brain, and that this survival has nothing at all to do with the existence of God, a god, or any version of primordial consciousness. In fact, I work to prove that such a primordial consciousness cannot possibly exist, and that consciousness itself is a capacity that is apical and not primordial.
...The research I've done, and the fully vetted results I've crafted into an increasingly accessible presentation does succeed in proving that what I believe to be true is, in fact, true. I have even factored out a definitive and surprisingly plausible narrative that fully explains why Earth's Homo Sapiens human beings have become inherently vulnerable to the error of linking post-corporeal survival to the existence of a Creator entity. That was the hardest part of this effort, but by keeping the impetus as primitive and primordial as possible, the dots really came together in the end. I'm really confident that this general approach to that question succeeds more profoundly that I could've ever anticipated when I took this overall challenge on.
...The notion will exist as fully and publicly available, and when it is I'll be sure to make this community aware of how to access it. It's much too comprehensive to post, but I am beginning to believe that I've finally worked out the bugs in how to properly present it. This, after over 3 years of struggle and varying degrees of success and failure. Yes, it's not an easy presentation.
...Thanks for expressing an interest.
Originally posted by elysiumfire
My efforts are to prove the definite plausibility of human conscious existence beyond the death of the brain, and that this survival has nothing at all to do with the existence of God, a god, or any version of primordial consciousness. In fact, I work to prove that such a primordial consciousness cannot possibly exist, and that consciousness itself is a capacity that is apical and not primordial.
I applaud your ambition and the height it seeks to reach. Consciousness is something, I too, set out to place within a plausible context of post-mortem survival, but what you have to provide to do this is a means by which it does survive, and somehow retain cohesiveness. What stops it from fading to total dissolution when the physical energy mechanisms are no longer sufficient to sustain it? What is its power source when the body is gone?
I can provide a plausible hypothesis on how the conscious state arises, but not how consciousness would survive the demise of the physical body. I can only imagine some form of energy transfer mechanism directly from the environment.
Originally posted by WanDash
I hope you're getting paid for this (work)...
You say "overall challenge"... Was this a "challenge" presented by someone-else, or are you saying "challenge" in a more base sense of..."it wasn't easy"?
And -- in your work (and vetting thereof)...did you deal with the question of "why" Homo Sapiens needed the God/Creator/gods concept...and subsequent to that "how" did the notion become so near-universal, developing into numerous religions that virtually cover the globe?
If answering those questions would steer this off-topic -- or, away from where you want to go with it -- don't bother answering ----- maybe another time.
Too much emphasis is being wasted on "energy" as the key to stuff that energy's impact on is - at best - ancillary.
...but then you fail to deliver a clear meaningful accoutrement of 'why' in the second clause...
Too much emphasis is being wasted on 'energy'...
That is just an awful way to state your opinion on how you think energy's role is far less important than what people think.
...as the key to stuff that energy's impact on is - at best - ancillary.
I can provide the emergence confluence, the existential impetus, the reason for indivisible cohesiveness and the requirement that it persist without possibility of physical dissolution.
It requires a full re-examination of the true nature of physical existence itself, but that results in resolving pretty much every intractable physics dilemma that persists anyway...
Originally posted by elysiumfire
Energy's role is everything! It is the bedrock of all existence...no exceptions! Whatever energy truly is, there are no existential parameters it does not subsume, and that includes the environment of the so-called afterlife. Any hypothesis that seeks to provide plausible support for the continuation of post-mortem consciousness must absolutely defer to energy's role and the laws by which it has been discovered to operate.
I can provide the emergence confluence, the existential impetus, the reason for indivisible cohesiveness and the requirement that it persist without possibility of physical dissolution.
Please clarify the following; 'emergence confluence'; 'the existential impetus'; 'indivisible cohesiveness'. You should not leave it up to the reader to supply their context, this is your thinking, not your readers!
It requires a full re-examination of the true nature of physical existence itself, but that results in resolving pretty much every intractable physics dilemma that persists anyway...
I take it you do realise what you are saying here? Are you privy to some alternate understanding in Newton's 3rd law? With this question I am referring to 'physical existence itself', or more to the point, the concept of 'physicality'. By all means, bring me up to speed and please state what is its 'true' nature? Let us resolve 'every intractable physics dilemma' together.
Originally posted by elysiumfire
I truly apologise for my didactism, and hope you accept it as friendly advice and not as offensively adversarial, but it needed stating.
Without the authoring brain (it's now dead, and no other brain can replace it as the author - it's an internal vs relative context issue that can't be resolved) the eternal human being is what it is, but that doesn't have to restrict that human being to an extremely finite response to what it's been presented with once it has transitioned. If the human being has allowed for adjustments, while its brain was building it as the "generated" informational whole that it is, then those adjustments are definitely available. It depends on how strident the human embraced each limitation (faith) it was taught to embrace, and that's the real scary part of all of this. Some people - while certainly aware that others have embraced alternative reality narratives - have never allowed such foolishness to be anything but evidence of the sort of evil that exists to destroy the souls of weak and recalcitrant people. These people wold probably be stranded within the imposed reality paradigm indefinitely - which could be a good thing for them, I suppose.
The word is didacticism.
...how can it be that you feel free to make such a definitive statement about something that you admit - within the same definitive statement - to having no clear understanding of concerning its physical properties or existential basis?
I made my own statement about energy with a full understanding that energy is a property...
The situation hasn't changed since Feynman stated those words. Energy is not the property of something else, energy is that which gives properties to everything else, and although it manifest in different forms, the two main manifestations are as potential energy and kinectic energy, all other manifested forms can be grouped under the two main manifestations. Even though I state...
It is important to realize that in physics today, we have no knowledge what energy is. Richard Feynman
...its manifestations as potential and kinectic energies may be all there is to it, there may be nothing below it upon which it depends for its existence...that is my current belief. The thing to understand is that before potential and kinectic energies arose, there was nothing, and from this understanding one comes to cognize that all existence in whatever shape and form must defer to energy's presence for their existence.
Whatever energy is, it is the bedrock of all other forms of existence
It can't simply exist.
Damn....there I go again. I wish I could write on a 5th grade level...
If I had decided to fully reveal all that I have discovered in that statement, then I would have.
If you're actually interested, then I'll hear from you.
Originally posted by elysiumfire
I made my own statement about energy with a full understanding that energy is a property...
A property of what?
en·er·gy [en-er-jee]
noun, plural en·er·gies.
1. the capacity for vigorous activity; available power: I eat chocolate to get quick energy.
2. an adequate or abundant amount of such power: I seem to have no energy these days.
3. Often, energies. a feeling of tension caused or seeming to be caused by an excess of such power: to work off one's energies at tennis.
4. an exertion of such power: She plays tennis with great energy.
5. the habit of vigorous activity; vigor as a characteristic: Foreigners both admire and laugh at American energy.
Originally posted by elysiumfire
It can't simply exist.
Not without coming into 'being', and according to current understanding, that is exactly what it did at the so-called 'Big Bang'. The way I view the theory of the Big Bang is that before it occurred, there was only kinectic energy in existence, there was no potential energy in the form of mass and matter. The Big Bang is the moment where kinetic energy halved into potential energy as mass and matter, which brought every other form of existence into being.
Originally posted by elysiumfire
If I had decided to fully reveal all that I have discovered in that statement, then I would have.
Here's what I've discovered. Your unwillingness to reveal anything is nothing more than a subterfuge of artifice.
subterfuge [suhb-ter-fyooj]
Part of Speech: noun
Definition: cheating
Synonyms: artifice, cheat, chicanery, deception, device, dishonesty, evasion, excuse, fraud, plan, ploy, pretense, refuge, ruse, scheme, sham, shift, sophistry, stratagem, trick