Evidence That the Human Body is a Projection of Consciousness

If only the atoms within the mind mech. could interact with the atoms outside it... Maybe that is what advanced manifesting is doing w/ those who can manifest matter out of what appears to be nothing.
@ times 1 wonders did the CREATOR generate the energy for many of the manifested forms or beings within reality in order to experience it all thru us all for some reason. Like giving LIGHTS bodies to see where or what they generally attract to, for potential further experiences within the phases of Life and death within EXISTENCE.

a reply to: smithjustinb



The Experiment That Forever Changed How We Think About Reality

We just went through the argument of a groundbreaking result in quantum mechanics known as Bell’s theorem. The black boxes don’t really flash red and green lights, but in the details that matter they match real experiments that measure the polarization of entangled photons.

Bell’s theorem draws a line in the sand between the strange quantum world and the familiar classical world that we know and love. It proves that hidden variable theories like the kind that Einstein and his buddies came up with simply aren’t true1. In its place is quantum mechanics, complete with its particles that can be entangled across vast distances. When you perturb the quantum state of one of these entangled particles, you instantaneously also perturb the other one, no matter where in the universe it is.

It’s comforting to think that we could explain away the strangeness of quantum mechanics if we imagined everyday particles with little invisible gears in them, or invisible stamps, or a hidden notebook, or something – some hidden variables that we don’t have access to – and these hidden variables store the “real” position and momentum and other details about the particle. It’s comforting to think that, at a fundamental level, reality behaves classically, and that our incomplete theory doesn’t allow us to peek into this hidden register. But Bell’s theorem robs us of this comfort. Reality is blurry, and we just have to get used to that fact.

The mental Universe (PDF File)

A fundamental conclusion of the new physics also acknowledges that the observer creates the reality. As observers, we are personally involved with the creation of our own reality. Physicists are being forced to admit that the universe is a “mental” construction. Pioneering physicist Sir James Jeans wrote: “The stream of knowledge is heading toward a non-mechanical reality; the universe begins to look more like a great thought than like a great machine. Mind no longer appears to be an accidental intruder into the realm of matter, we ought rather hail it as the creator and governor of the realm of matter.

henry.pha.jhu.edu...

The difficulty is reality. Almost everyone thinks that the world is real. But we know that the world is not real. While science cannot establish that something is true, science can establish that something is not true. In fact, that is the essence of science—that hypotheses are falsifiable. Note not verifiable, falsifiable! And it is a matter of fact that we have verified that the possibility that what you are observing is a real world, can, and must, be rejected. Sir Arthur Eddington and Sir James Jeans recognized this immediately when quantum mechanics was discovered in 1925. Einstein realized it too, but feeling that it could not be true, he spent the rest of his life trying to break quantum mechanics, with complete lack of success. Anton Zeilinger and his colleagues have recently experimentally demonstrated that reality can be ruled out (Nature 446, 871, 2007).

I have created an illustration of the famous John Wheeler delayed choice experiment: (henry.pha.jhu.edu...). What this experiment shows, is that Schrödinger's cat's history is determined by your observation: "If you find a dead cat, an examination by a veterinary forensic pathologist would determine the cat to have died eight hours ago. Your observation not only creates a current reality, it also creates the history appropriate to that reality" (Rosenblum and Kuttner, "Quantum Enigma," Oxford, 2006). This is where evolution comes from! The most recent experimental verification of the delayed-choice result, is by V. Jacques et al., Science, 315, 966, 2007.

Consciousness and the double-slit interference pattern: Six experiments

A double-slit optical system was used to test the possible role of consciousness in the
collapse of the quantum wavefunction. The ratio of the interference pattern’s double-slit spectral
power to its single-slit spectral power was predicted to decrease when attention was focused toward
the double slit as compared to away from it. Each test session consisted of 40 counterbalanced
attention-toward and attention-away epochs, where each epoch lasted between 15 and 30 s. Data
contributed by 137 people in six experiments, involving a total of 250 test sessions, indicate that on
average the spectral ratio decreased as predicted (z=-4.36, p=6·10-6). Another 250 control
sessions conducted without observers present tested hardware, software, and analytical procedures
for potential artifacts; none were identified (z=0.43, p=0.67). Variables including temperature,
vibration, and signal drift were also tested, and no spurious influences were identified. By contrast,
factors associated with consciousness, such as meditation experience, electrocortical markers of
focused attention, and psychological factors including openness and absorption, significantly
correlated in predicted ways with perturbations in the double-slit interference pattern. The results
appear to be consistent with a consciousness-related interpretation of the quantum measurement
problem. © 2012 Physics Essays Publication.

Quantum experiment preludes the endgame for local realism – photonic Bell violation closes the fair-sampling loophole

A recent experiment has, for the first time, closed the fair-sampling loophole for photons [9]. It employed a significantly optimized source of entangled pairs achieving excellent fiber coupling efficiencies and state-of-the-art high-efficiency superconducting detectors to reach the necessary total detection efficiency. The researchers were able to measure about 75% of all photons in each arm. This rules out all local realistic explanations that rely on unfair sampling using a form of Bell’s inequality developed about 20 years ago by the American physicist Philippe Eberhard, which requires an efficiency of only two thirds [10]. The recent experiment makes the photon the first physical system for which all three loopholes have been closed, albeit in different experiments.
Although most scientists do not expect any surprises and believe that quantum physics will prevail over local realism, it is still conceivable that different loopholes are exploited in different experiments. It is this last piece in the history of Bell tests which is still missing – a final and conclusive experiment violating Bell’s inequality while closing all loopholes simultaneously [11]. It is not yet clear whether such an experiment will be achieved first for photons or atoms or some other quantum system, but if it can be successfully performed, one needs to accept at least one of the following radical views: there is a hidden faster-than-light communication in nature, or we indeed live in a world in which physical properties do not always exist independent of observation. Almost 50 years after the formulation of local realism, its endgame clearly has begun

a reply to: Ophiuchus 13

Maybe they can... maybe that's why we have a material body...

An experimental test of non-local realism

Most working scientists hold fast to the concept of 'realism' - a viewpoint according to which an external reality exists independent of observation. But quantum physics has shattered some of our cornerstone beliefs. According to Bell's theorem, any theory that is based on the joint assumption of realism and locality (meaning that local events cannot be affected by actions in space-like separated regions) is at variance with certain quantum predictions. Experiments with entangled pairs of particles have amply confirmed these quantum predictions, thus rendering local realistic theories untenable. Maintaining realism as a fundamental concept would therefore necessitate the introduction of 'spooky' actions that defy locality. Here we show by both theory and experiment that a broad and rather reasonable class of such non-local realistic theories is incompatible with experimentally observable quantum correlations. In the experiment, we measure previously untested correlations between two entangled photons, and show that these correlations violate an inequality proposed by Leggett for non-local realistic theories. Our result suggests that giving up the concept of locality is not sufficient to be consistent with quantum experiments, unless certain intuitive features of realism are abandoned.

a reply to: TheBandit795

a reply to: iosolomon

What are you talking about? How will a dictionary define what reality is for someone else? 

A dictionary can define what the word Christ means. I never spoke about reality.

I am referring to the incarnation/reincarnation of Jesus Christ and Buddha. There is no "serious" misunderstanding on my part. The misunderstanding is on your part. 

Anyone who says they are Jesus Christ or Siddhartha Buddha, must not know what the two words actually mean. 

Now if someone says 'I am the resurrection of Jesus of Nazereth' that's something entirely different. But that doesn't necessarily imply 'Christhood'.


   
 

a reply to: Visitor2012

Exactly. Thats why I said earlier you can claim to be one with god but not god. That title belongs to everything.

a reply to: sled735

Nope, he literally posted a thread to disambiguate that he and only he was the one true god (and a bunch of other famous people)

But yes it's another topic. It was just so you could understand the character better.

originally posted by: iosolomon


Now, now, you are poisoning the well. But as a human, I do NOT believe ANYONE should be locked up for delusions or hallucinations (or even suicide attempts or ideation).

Who said anything about locking up or even taking pills? I don't support this.


All I said is sometimes it's good to talk to a professional or even just normal people, and being open to what they experience of this reality and confront yours with them, finding common ground instead of staying locked in a small bubble of reality centered around you.

You live in a society, that means compromises. Maybe society doesn't want you as a god. Have you thought about that?

a reply to: SpaceGoatFarts

"You live in a society, that means compromises. Maybe society doesn't want you as a god. Have you thought about that?"



thats ..the whole formula of this sick society..

THe biggest healing for this earth would be if this "society" stops bringing people down who are different.

They are not only bringing people down who think they are god...Society does this with everything new...everything different..We are not even in Iran..where this is even stronger.. But this mechanism still works...

originally posted by: SpaceGoatFarts
You live in a society, that means compromises. Maybe society doesn't want you as a god. Have you thought about that?

Who cares what society wants?? What society wants for me will ALWAYS be subservient to what I want for myself.

originally posted by: TheBandit795

originally posted by: SpaceGoatFarts
You live in a society, that means compromises. Maybe society doesn't want you as a god. Have you thought about that?

Who cares what society wants?? What society wants for me will ALWAYS be subservient to what I want for myself.

I am not saying you can not try to do as you please in all circumstances. I'm just saying don't come crying when you have to face the consequences of a total disdain for others.

originally posted by: kauskau

They are not only bringing people down who think they are god...Society does this with everything new...everything different..We are not even in Iran..where this is even stronger.. But this mechanism still works...

Lol, that may be true in certain part of the population, but I can guarantee you it's the exact opposite for the youth where being different is the most important.

It's always boiling down to conservative forces (usually older people) VS progressive ones (usually the youth).

The cult of being different sometimes even confines to the ridicule, just go read tumblr and you'll see what I mean where everyone will actually insult you if you even dare to think of yourself as "normal". It's actually a cult of victimization, and the more differences you have (overweight, gay, black, schizoid, fetishist, ...) the better you are as an individual.

There are always two sides to a coin and that is the ugly side of the ego cult. You even have this in the conspiracy crowd where people love to say they are indigo/starseeds/anything as long as they aren't a "normie".

In those cases, funnily, it's those people who bring down the majority of others for being "all the same".

So it's truly the pot and the kettle when saying "society" brings people down. Everyone is guilty of it.

Even I do it for thinking I know better.

a reply to: SpaceGoatFarts

Exactly. Thats why I said earlier you can claim to be one with god but not god. That title belongs to everything.

I am pretty sure that title belongs to the One who will be deciding whether you should be sent to Hell or not...but, hey, who am I to shatter your American fantasy that there is no such thing as God?

Who said anything about locking up or even taking pills? I don't support this.

That is what your precious religion of psychiatry does.

You live in a society, that means compromises. Maybe society doesn't want you as a god. Have you thought about that?

kauskau replied to this very well.

I will take your words, and spin them a bit, "The Jews live in a society, that means compromises. Maybe society doesn't want the Jews to live. Have you thought about that? Now, send them off to the ovens!"

No, really, in America, there is a thing called the First Amendment. If I want to believe that I am God or (correctly) identify Myself as Jesus Christ, then that is my right to do so. You do not have to accept me or join my religion, but telling me that I am "psychiatrically unwell" is only your opinion. And that is fine, you can hold such an opinion.

However, when you tell me that I should go see one of your "priests" to get "healed," then you are overstepping the boundaries. What makes your religion of psychiatry superior to my religion that I am God? Just because more people believe in it? Are you really that naive?

finding common ground instead of staying locked in a small bubble of reality centered around you.

I am afraid that you need to take a good, long look in the mirror. You are the one who is locked in a small bubble of reality. You are trying to force me to join this bubble of yours instead of finding the "common ground" that you, yourself, spoke of.

The common ground, relating to this thread, is that reality is different for each person.

originally posted by: SpaceGoatFarts
I am not saying you can not try to do as you please in all circumstances. I'm just saying don't come crying when you have to face the consequences of a total disdain for others.

Who said anything about a disdain for others??

originally posted by: TheBandit795

originally posted by: SpaceGoatFarts
I am not saying you can not try to do as you please in all circumstances. I'm just saying don't come crying when you have to face the consequences of a total disdain for others.

Who said anything about a disdain for others??

It's an hypothetical situation. So basically we agree. Do as you will as long as you don't piss off others.

Isolomon can claim he is my god. I don't have to accept it. He can simply keep this for him but he chose to post it.

Anyway this is a derail.

originally posted by: Visitor2012
A dictionary can define what the word Christ means. I never spoke about reality.

Christ means the Messiah. How do you know that those who claim to be Jesus Christ (aka, the Messiah) are not?

Why can't people follow simple logic? You were the one who brought up the dictionary. I replied that the dictionary cannot define reality. Therefore, you bringing up the dictionary was the fallacy of red herring. It had no relation to what I brought up. In other words, you shouldn't have brought up the dictionary in regards to my post.

In addition, the dictionary does not define connotations. Jesus Christ is the Son of God. Therefore, when People speak of Jesus Christ, they are usually referring to the Man (NOT to imply sexism, as it is my belief, there are Goddesses and Daughter of Goddess) who was the Son of God. That wouldn't be in the dictionary...

Anyone who says they are Jesus Christ or Siddhartha Buddha, must not know what the two words actually mean.

I really don't think you know what Jesus Christ or Siddhartha Buddha means. When someone says they are Jesus Christ, they are referring to the Man who was the incarnation/reincarnation of Jesus Christ. As the Bible makes clear, Jesus Christ was 100% Man and 100% God (or Christ).

I do not mind if you wanted to clarify what I meant by Jesus Christ, but it goes without saying. I do not know what you are telling me that I am wrong with how I used Jesus Christ when I am not wrong...

Now if someone says 'I am the resurrection of Jesus of Nazereth' that's something entirely different. But that doesn't necessarily imply 'Christhood'.

Actually, that would imply 'Christhood.' However, the majority of People who claim to be Jesus Christ usually refer to the "reincarnation of Jesus Christ."
 
In conclusion, when someone claims to be Jesus Christ, that is reality to them, and they should not be forced to subscribe to YOUR religion of psychiatry (which only has one goal in mind, and that's not to "heal," but to convince you that are you sick, in order to....can you guess it? Yup! To make profits!)

So, the point is, if someone claims to be Jesus Christ, that is reality to them, and who are we to say otherwise?

a reply to: SpaceGoatFarts

At that moment there wasn't yet any consciousness in you.

You speak about consciousness as if it is a separate entity or force. Either that, or you're confusing it with conscious awareness or sensory perception or the moment of sentience. Consciousness, as it's normally referred to, IS everything that exists. Including the appearance of the physical Universe including mind and body. It's the fundamental fabric of physicality itself.

What you said, would be like saying 'when the ocean wave is born, at that moment there wasn't any water in it'. Yet, without water, there is no Ocean and most certainly no waves.

originally posted by: iosolomon

The common ground, relating to this thread, is that reality is different for each person.

Some realities are shared by many. You being god isn't one.

Like you said. It's my opinion. And it's still my opinion to say you should probably lay down the ego a bit if you think you are god. I never said you have to take pills or be locked up. You are just offended that I don't accept you as my personal god and voice it.

And FYI I'm not American and psychiatry isn't my religion.

a reply to: raymundoko

Rapid changes in histone deacetylases and inflammatory gene expression in expert meditators

Study reveals gene expression changes with meditation

a reply to: SpaceGoatFarts

That I agree with. Yep. Back to the topic.