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.

 

The Big Picture?

page: 3
54
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 02:46 PM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


LOVE this topic and so glad you brought this on to the forum for discussion.

It seems to me that Science is slowly coming around, helping aid our understanding of consciousness.

Robert Lanza's video really makes you think. What we actually see and observe may not be "what is" . Is there truly an external world?

Space and time being tools of the mind is something else to think about and ponder on.

We do not have the tech nor the tools to get where we want in regards to consciousness. Observation is key.. or so it seems.

Maybe in the next hundred years we will have a major breakthrough and people will then believe that we are in fact creating our own reality here on Earth as well as our afterlife.




posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 02:48 PM
link   
Highly speculative but I like it (on a philosophical level.)

People who participate in shamanic rituals often describe being transported across the universe, where sound, thought and other sense are mashed all into one. I can't find a good picture to describe it, but the interconnected woven web that keeps popping up in the universe and in the brain and elsewhere is often described. (Or something similar).




posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 02:53 PM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


SnF good share SLAYER69

It WILL be interesting to SEE if the paint brushes are given back


NAMASTE*******
edit on 1/20/14 by Ophiuchus 13 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 03:01 PM
link   

tgidkp
reply to post by webedoomed
 

i always wonder why the quantum-bullying meme is so powerful?


Because there's so much room for debate that the most foolish ideas must be thrown out to progress towards the truth. That this process is seen as "bullying" is one's own prerogative.


tgidkp
reply to post by webedoomed
 




.... The wave would otherwise flow back and forth.... since the frequency isn't exactly aligned with the distance.... put an instrument which interferes with the wave....


the way that you have stated your interpretation of the experiment leads me to think that you also do not have a correct understanding of the underlying phenomena. what you have said is relevant to mechanical waveforms. because of the quantized (particle) nature of the wavefunction, neither the distance nor the measuring device, explicitly, can be the cause of the phase cancellation.


That's fine. I don't claim to have the ultimate grasp of any of this. Am complete laymen with an internet connection.

So a "quantized" wavefunction means we're dealing with unknowns, and therefore must work in terms of possibilities and probabilities. This in no way describes it's true nature, only our limitations in understanding. There is still an a particle which is doing it's thing.


rather, each and every photon interferes with itself.


Itself explicitly? I don't buy that. The photons within two lasers may interfere with each other.


tgidkp
reply to post by webedoomed
 

in order for a particle to cancel with itself according to the configuration of the entire system (which includes distance, measuring device and many other things), it must somehow be able to "know" what the entire system looks like. the apparent ability to 'survey the scene' and behave accordingly tells us one of two things (in my estimation):

1 - the 'dumb' particle (or maybe the system, itself) is actually, inherently, intelligent.
2 - the interference is due to an intermixing of the time forward wavefunction with a backward time wavefunction from the future. (incidentally, this is why the original mathematical formulation of quantum mechanics did not include a time correlate.)


I'll tell you what. You lost me at a particle canceling itself out. What exactly does that mean? Does it not exist anymore? I think it does. It's a particle! That being said, I find your #2 to be quite interesting. I've had some bizarre thoughts along this line from time to time.


the second scenario is in my opinion more interesting, and has been demonstrated in the experiment at the following link:

physicsworld.com...


I browsed the article, but wasn't coming to the same conclusion. Let me get some grub in me and come back to it.



posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 03:03 PM
link   

tgidkp
reply to post by webedoomed
 

a thought is the future causing the present.

quite simply: your ability to make a rational decision, the future projected onto the present, can be correlated in a meaningful way to the 'spooky' behavior of quantum systems.


I don't agree.

A thought is a current projection of the mind to itself of rationalizing potential possibilities, potential outcomes and reactions based on possible actions.

A human thought is in the now, it is current and is never future, regardless if the outcome is a desired outcome, the thought is a mental calculation based in the now. After a human thought is thought it in the past, it was never the future.

Understanding basic premises is essential to understanding the bigger picture.

Human thoughts are not future.
edit on 20-1-2014 by theabsolutetruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 03:05 PM
link   

Realtruth

Words
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


All these notions prove is that humans enjoy speculating beyond facts into areas that they cannot understand.


"Facts" are nothing more than someone that made others believe something was so.



Would you care to elaborate on that opinion?



posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 03:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Realtruth
 





"Facts" are nothing more than someone that made others believe something was so.


Has anyone seen an atom before? If not, then what sort of facts are we dealing with in terms of quantum mechanics?



posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 03:34 PM
link   

Now, the Questions.

Are we reaching the point of possible Global Awareness of ourselves and our place in the Universe? How do these dots connect? Do they even connect at all? What story about us and our planet and existence are possibly being revealed to/about us? I dunno, has anybody else here been paying attention to these developments and are becoming ever more increasingly aware of the fact that we as a species really need to pull our collective heads out of our rears and start pulling together?

What do you think? Are we about to reach the tipping point of no return just like when the first real images of the Earth from space revealed that there were no artificial boundaries between countries but a single planet and just how vulnerable & special we of "Spaceship Earth" truly are?


I honestly don't know if we are reaching a point of "global awareness" of selves/place in the universe but can say there are some on this thread who seem to be in synch on some levels--& as always, some who are not. Some perspectives, from the "hard" sciences, to those who are more familiar with the "abstract", ie., epistemology, religion, metaphysics, etc. are voicing their opinions & the views are diverse.

Based on the examples you provided, for me, these hold true at the moment:

1. Facts are probabilities
2. Possibilities are certainties
3. Humans can't definitely "know" all facts/materials as they, like we, are both physical & spiritual; external & internal
4. What is old is new, & what is new is old
5. To facilitate our physical & spiritual journey & enhancement in the meantime; encourage continued communication & collaboration across disciplines, countries, systems, universe....


Because of his accent (Bostonian/Upper NE US?), I kept on hearing Pot Of Gold when the Biocentrism presenter said "particle," lol!



edit on 20-1-2014 by BurningSpearess because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 03:36 PM
link   

AfterInfinity

Realtruth

Words
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


All these notions prove is that humans enjoy speculating beyond facts into areas that they cannot understand.


"Facts" are nothing more than someone that made others believe something was so.



Would you care to elaborate on that opinion?



Sure since it relates to the topic.

From the time we are born we are indoctrinated, we are a blank slate, so facts and opinions mean nothing, but as time moves on we are told over and over the way things are, so that is how they come to be.

In a remote indigenous tribe, in the Amazon, western science, facts and figures mean nothing, because they are a compartmentalized ideology that is reaffirmed within its own constructs, almost like a religious text pointing to another passage to prove one that is being debated.

An amazon tribe is likely to see " the big picture", because it does not have all of the mental laws that we have in our society and keep reaffirming as "Fact".

How can one see "the big picture" if they think that all of the photos that have previously been taken are "the big picture", when most likely they are only just a part of it.

We try to define everything from narrow minded dogmatic belief systems passed down from generation to generation, when it's quite possible we need to view things in a completely different light.

This is where the quantum reality is interesting, because it lends way to less judgement, constraints and more of a person finding their own path.

I hope that made sense.

RT

edit on 20-1-2014 by Realtruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 04:02 PM
link   

Bassago
reply to post by Dianec
 




It wouldn't be too difficult to all do an experiment to see how it works.


Now that is a great idea.

How would we go about forming such an experiment here?


I know there is a thread on here somewhere that gives tips to manifest ones destiny (thinking positive and how to reel the mind back in if thoughts turn negative). I'll try to find that and type some of them here (hopefully that's allowed as long as I link the source). I bet some on here can also provide some ideas. Then - compile those in short sentences to keep it simple. Print them out and have them handy. I wonder if you or someone else could create a thread for the experiment - keep people mindful of shifts in experiences. Just some thoughts.

A coincidence - ran to the store a bit ago and asked the cashier how her day was going. She said, "fine - has been slow but suddenly just got really busy - as if people feel each other's energy and all thought to come to the store at the same time". This is exactly what we're speaking of (or contemplating). How much are we creating our reality based on energy (electrical or otherwise)? How much does the energy of others affect us unconsciously - does it alter our behavior more than we believe? I think so. Can we rise above that and create a different reality? I wouldn't mind trying to see what I can attract into my life by simply changing my thoughts.



posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 04:28 PM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


Trying to make sense of this Slayer, I'm inclined to believe that you about to find the path to the Oneness of it all.
We await your excellent report on that mysterious feature that escapes so many.



posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 04:29 PM
link   
I found the thread I had read long ago. I have to revisit it as I have forgotten the details. In trying to figure out how thoughts are more than invisible things only affecting our immediate behavior, which in turn affects others - I think it's good to see how interlaced the entire universe is with us - and how we are with each other via experiencing for ourselves. If this can be proven through thousands of people applying it I think it would validate almost all said in the thread I'm typing in now.

The OP of the linked thread has authored some books on the laws of attraction - basically what we're talking about herein on some level. I've read a couple of these books and find them hopeful (not sure if the OP's books) - only to not really know how to practice (simple step by step ideas - like the OP's thread appears to provide).

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Basically - don't try to visualize so you can have your life be like one day - only hoping it will come. Instead - if you believe you already have it you will have it. Visualization comes into play with that too - feeling like you have it now so it isn't something in the future or based on a deficiency (what we don't have and hope to have). The action part I'm not sure I completely understand yet but what you put out is what decides your energy field. Negative feelings shouldn't be rejected but noted as communication your off track - then you shift to the positive but I have to read more to see how that works.

I believe to make this work we need to not overthink it, but rather - become it. How to do that I don't know. Detach perhaps. Take the emotion out of it? If it matches the thought I had earlier about no chemicals but rather just energy via electrical fields that would make sense. Becoming it means not over analyzing it - the emotion may come later (even if a split second after). Not before though. Don't know if that makes sense - hard to articulate.
edit on 20-1-2014 by Dianec because: Didn't make sense in some spots so changed it so it would.



posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 04:39 PM
link   
i hope this is not too far off topic....

reply to post by webedoomed
 


You lost me at a particle canceling itself out. What exactly does that mean? Does it not exist anymore?

whether or not you buy it, "canceling itself out" refers to the mathematics, which are formulated according to observation. even when one single photon at a time is released through the system, the interference pattern appears. mathematically, this is represented with the square root of one, or the imaginary unit.

the wavefunction is drawn in the complex plane. the complex plane has two components, the real unit, and the imaginary unit. the expected values of the observables are indicated by the real part of the function. the "unknowns" (from your quote below) are plotted on the complex axis. the phase of the photon is split into self-interfering conjugates, which as shown in the below diagram, the imaginary unit disappears and becomes a real value when the conjugates are restored. this is how we end up with 'spin up' and 'spin down' entangled pairs.

hopefully you can see the relevance of this mathematical treatment by comparing the statistical plots of the wavefunction distribution and the normal distribution... also shown below...







a "quantized" wavefunction means we're dealing with unknowns, and therefore must work in terms of possibilities and probabilities. This in no way describes it's true nature, only our limitations in understanding.


it is unfortunate that quantum theory has only shown us how to model these systems mathematically. i, too, would enjoy an explanation of its "true nature". in the process of arriving at such an explanation, we should not toss out explanations we dont like simply because they contain language ("woo-woo") that we do not appreciate.



posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 04:47 PM
link   
reply to post by theabsolutetruth
 


Human thoughts are not future.


your description is sufficient. we are not in disagreement.

the only reason i use the word "future" is to represent the idea that the mind occupies a dimension of the time-track which is "above" the track looking downward upon it (perpendicular). this is how we can "see" into the future and into the past. this is in direct contrast to the typical one-dimensional time-forward description of time.

whether or not what we see is real (the past is also a fabrication of the mind, yes?), is up for debate.



posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 04:59 PM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 



You set the bar high with your posts Slayer.
It is nice to see someone trying to put the pieces of the jigsaw puzzle together.
I feel It is true though, that "fact" is just a belief backed by a "big group" and my truth is applicable to me only.



posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 05:22 PM
link   

tgidkp
reply to post by theabsolutetruth
 


Human thoughts are not future.


your description is sufficient. we are not in disagreement.

the only reason i use the word "future" is to represent the idea that the mind occupies a dimension of the time-track which is "above" the track looking downward upon it (perpendicular). this is how we can "see" into the future and into the past. this is in direct contrast to the typical one-dimensional time-forward description of time.

whether or not what we see is real (the past is also a fabrication of the mind, yes?), is up for debate.


I think the human mind producing thoughts is rather a visual imagining rather than a dimensional or time anomaly. Human thoughts are not seeing into the future or past, they are the human minds attempt at visualising imagined scenarios.

Time and dimensions are other subjects. Thinking is one thing but resonating with Eternal and Infinite energy is something else, for example meditating isn't the same as rationalizing.
edit on 20-1-2014 by theabsolutetruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 05:26 PM
link   
reply to post by tgidkp
 


I'm just going to leave it here:



We need to take special note that we can experience nature only through various interaction processes. Accordingly, we are better off by visualizing nature as a creative system engineer. Therefore, we should humbly act as reverseengineers to explore and emulate the natural processes that will lead us to better understand the purpose of the cosmic evolution and then figure out our proper place within the biosphere and then the cosmic system. For generations students have been trained to “crank the equations” instead of nurturing their inquiring minds. If “nobody understands quantum mechanics”, we ought to urge the students with proactive encouragements that there must be something seriously wrong with the interpretations of QM.

Link

Something is seriously wrong with the interpretations of QM, and some NASA scientists are in agreement.

Seems pretty obvious the foundations were built on assumptions that don't pan out when basic common sense is applied.

Pretty sure there's a link in this thread which talks about E8, and how it may better explain QM. I think that's the key to it.

There are geometric shapes, relating to dimensions simply not known to us in full yet, that will explain the mechanics of the very small to an exact science, rather than as mere possibilities and probabilities.

Ask that guy if he thinks this relates to any "woo-woo" and get back to me.


edit on 20-1-2014 by webedoomed because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 06:22 PM
link   
reply to post by webedoomed
 


Interesting video the E8 theory, or whatever its called.

It just looks like they are just rediscovering the same patterns that exist fractally in everything were already observing in the universe.

I can get down with some geometry for sure but it still doesnt help me tie awareness into the world, awareness however you think about it.

Im going to have to read into the E8 theory more because i dont understand what the circles are representing. I mean its great that all those circles are spinning around each other but the hell is the circle and what is the circle made up of, more circles?
edit on 20141America/ChicagoquAmerica/Chicago1231322014 by onequestion because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 06:27 PM
link   
I'm still interested in reading someones theory on what authority in the cosmos is acting as an enabler in the universe for things to be working together?



posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 06:41 PM
link   

onequestion
I'm still interested in reading someones theory on what authority in the cosmos is acting as an enabler in the universe for things to be working together?


There's no need for an "authority" or for things to be working "together".

These are concepts your human mind can relate to and attempt to impose them onto the whole of the cosmos.

The cosmos simply is, as far as we currently know.

The video in the OP which relates to the 200 factors needed for life to evolve (as we know it), shows what assumptions are being held by belief, and which ones are being dismissed because it doesn't fit belief.

Notice how he states "within 2%", then switches to "exactly". Shows how he's fudging to justify his belief.

He also explains, rationally, how this could be, then goes on to dismiss it with emotions meant to convey a sense of absurdity.

The absurdity is that this scientist can't accept the rational explanation.



new topics

top topics



 
54
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join