freedom from religion

[○]

Additionally, we live in an increasingly technological world. It's a good thing for people to have at least a rudimentary knowledge of how stuff works. Where the products we rely on come from.

I fear the rotting of societies critical thinking fueled by spiritualism leading to a state where nobody can maintain the technologies everyone relies on to survive. Humanity is passing the threshold where we need high technology to support our huge population. This could cause a real dark age for human kind where many would die and all would have enormously reduced quality of life.

Is the rotting of societies critical thinking fueled by religion/spiritualism? Or is it due to the educational system? Religion has been around a lot longer than science, has been more prevalent than science for almost all of human histroy. To cry woe is us at this point, seems kind of silly. Science has a place of honor in society, the lay people accept what they are told is true even though very few can actually understand what is being said, or the "proof" behind it. We have been in the dark ages, they ended long ago. The real threat of a dark age is if a coronal mass ejection heads directly toward our planet, wiping out all our communication systems, electricty and the like. Humanity would be thrown backwards 200+ years instantaneously, and it has nothing to do with ignorance of technology, it has to do with the fact that we have become so dependent upon it. Doesn't matter how much you know about how a cell phone signal works, or how to make a semi-conductor, if those things are completely destroyed, your knowledge is most likely irrelevant. Our society is so compartmentalized now, so interdependent upon other's knowledge that it would take a very very long time to return to even a rudimentary quality of life we currently have. No one will care about the internet/computers/television when you are only concerned about where your next meal comes from, how to get fresh water, or how you are going to survive the winter with no heat.

Now you might argue that technology does not really increase the quality of life but it would be a little silly to argue this on an internet message board

I would be a moron to agruge against this premise. Technology massively increases the quality of life. But what are we doing with that quality of life? Sitting around watching TV, Movies, computer games, internet porn? My belief is that technology allows us the free time away from labor and toil to consider the bigger questions of life. Who are we? Where did we come from? Where are we going? What is the meaning of life? SOme of those questions can be answered by science, others cannot. Technology frees us to explore all those options. Unfortunately that is not the case in most instances, people remain as blind and ignorant as ever, squandering the opportunities presented to them by progress to ponder the truly meaningful questions.

This is a long term 'sci-fi' outcome of rampant spiritualism and superstition. There are other, more tangible worries too.

Rampant spiritualism and superstition? This is not the middle ages, this is the 21st century. I think this comment is a gross overstatement of reality. You are talking about a very narrow section of society in the United States, not some broad global conspiracy of ignorance. In fact people are less spiritual and superstitious now than in any other time in human history. There seems to have been a rise in it lately though, could be due to the religious right having grabbed the nutsack of the US for the past 8 years. It could be that something is happening that is making large groups of people, from various educational and social backgrounds to realize there may be something more going on than what we have been beliving. 2012 is resonating with many people, and in a fundamentally different way than other millenial movements for example. Apparent "awakening" is happening all over the planet all at the same time. Who knows what is behind it, but you can see from evidence on this website that more and more people are exploring the possibilities that surround us. Something is happening, and it is not necessairily a bad thing. There is no good information, and no bad information, it is all what you do with it. Seeking and questioning are always good things. Being dogmatic and closed to new ideas and possibilitis is always a bad thing.

If you teach your children a bunch of superstitions at the expense of critical thinking you are putting them at a huge disadvantage. You are directly reducing the quality of their life to satisfy your own sensibilities. This is child abuse.

You might, in fact, be squelching a genius mind who otherwise could have helped improve life for everyone. The people who construct these pseudoscience new age mythologies come off as damn smart people. I beleive that they are but they're wasting it selfishly. They're using their innate genius to 1. satisfy their own morbid dread. 2. make money off impressionable youths who are not equipped with the necessary critical thinking skills to tell the difference between shit and shine-o-la

This is so much a black or white statement that it cannot be justified. It is the all or nothing argument and is faulty. In addition, who are you to decide what is best for others, and how they should or should not raise their children? You are projecting your beliefs onto others and dehumanizing them if they do not conform to what you believe to be "right". How many "intelligent" children who were brought up in religious households go on to become fervert practioners of that faith? Probably less than half. A religious upbringing does not necessairily lead to a religious adult. Critical thinking is not the one and only way to raise children. I put at least as much creedence upon creative thinking, as critical. Should they have both? Of course, a well rounded individual will most likely contribute more to society and in turn make my life and everyone else's better. But to say there is only one way, and to not do it that way is child abuse, is just absurd. Also it is not for you to decide how genius expresses itself. Maybe one of these geniuses will prove the existence of god. Maybe one will discover free energy. Maybe one will find a way to heal with a touch. There are great mysteries and unanswered questions in every aspect of life. Let those find their own path and make contributions in that which gives them joy. As Joseph Campbell would say, "Find your bliss and follow it"

I'll take a Motzart equally with an Einstein. We need them both. They both improve life for everyone.

Sorry i'm making short posts but awesome posts Saidin! And everyone that has contributed! Very interesting from "both" sides. Both make valid points.


And my whole take on this: See sig

 

[burnt]

Yes, but you are looking at it from a purely scientific perspective, crunching the numbers and applying an ontological materialism to the equation. That is fine, we need people just like you in order to "prove" the big questions, with numbers and symbols that very few people outside your particular "club" can understand. We also need the artists, and creative thinkers to point people in possible directions to help uncover the mysteries that strict book knowledge won't be able to conceptualize. Critical thinking is necessary, but so is creative.

Agree creativity is important and beneficial to society.

Ahh, but the similarities are there, some more superficial than others. You would do better to say, it is unlikely rocks are alive, the earth is alive, the universe is alive. You are stating a fact, where you cannot state it. I have given a framework to indicate how it is possible these things could be conscious. Certian "in favor" cosmological theories would lend creedence to my hypothesis. Torsion fields and implosion physics would provide that evidence as well. Sure it is speculation at the moment, but one that is being backed by more and more sicence every day.

Torsion fields I don't know much about but is as far as I know high controversial. I know about particle's spin but I don't see what that has to do with proving the universe is conscious of telepathy or whatever else these theories claim to prove.

Heck, I believe they have even proven that the speed of light has changed over time...so much for immutable laws of nature!

The laws of nature could very well change as well as be different in other universes. No qualms there.

How is Holographic/super-sting/membrane theory outdated?

This area particularly gets on my nerves. People use these theories to justify spiritual phenomenon. You can't use these theories which we still have a small understanding off to confirm spiritual ideas. Furthermore these theories may one day be falsified. They need experimental backing. Although some argue string theory won't even be testable I think there are some indirect ways of testing. Even if they are true how does that prove that the universe is conscious?

Ahh, but there is a problem here as well. Legit researchers will continue to hold onto their theories in the face of new evidence, EXACTLY because they have spent a lifetime creating/supporting/defending their theories. It happens all over science. People never like to be proven wrong, especially when you have invested your life's work in something, and will fight tooth and nail to keep their ideas from becoming "outdated" Science has its own speed bumps to progress, and are distrustful of new ideas which contradict established beliefs. Blatant fraud is wrong, but it happens in science as well. No one is immune, its just that science generally is better equipped and has a larger platform for calling people out for it.

There are plenty of scientists who are arrogant and stubborn agree. Theories advance and thats the point.


Anyway I just want to ask how does scientific theories about strings or extra dimensions prove the universe is alive or conscious or thus confirm any spiritual notions about anything?

Another question. How would you go about redefining life to consider something like the earth alive?

DMTtripping2space

All in all...what makes our "definition" of something being conscious correct vs. someone elses?

Again you must define consciousness. If consciousness can just mean anything well then yes anything could be conscious. But that kind of reasoning has no merit. Its just giving in to someone else's view point even if that view point is based on nothing at all.

 

[Saidin]

Torsion fields I don't know much about but is as far as I know high controversial. I know about particle's spin but I don't see what that has to do with proving the universe is conscious of telepathy or whatever else these theories claim to prove.

Torsion fields are still controversial, but there is some science to back them up. Particle spin proves that information travels any distance instantaneously. Take two electrons, separate them across the entire universe, and when one spins in one direction, the other will spin in the exact same way, at the exact same time. This means that information has a way to be transmitted everywhere in existence, with no delay. Membrane/Super-string theory postulates that everything is contained in a membrane, all things everywhere are connected on a fundamental level. What this would suggest is that all information is everywhere at the same time. Everything that is, was or will be is connected everywhere. What you do here, is in some medium available to something 10 billion light years away, instantaneously. The universe is one enormous information field, ie: conscious.

This area particularly gets on my nerves. People use these theories to justify spiritual phenomenon. You can't use these theories which we still have a small understanding off to confirm spiritual ideas. Furthermore these theories may one day be falsified. They need experimental backing. Although some argue string theory won't even be testable I think there are some indirect ways of testing. Even if they are true how does that prove that the universe is conscious?

Anyway I just want to ask how does scientific theories about strings or extra dimensions prove the universe is alive or conscious or thus confirm any spiritual notions about anything?

If they are true, the univese is one giant informational field, containing everything that has ever, is, or will ever occur. It becomes omniscient and omnipresent. Does it deserve worship? No. It just is. Does it have to actively participate in life? No. It just is. Should we anthorpomorphize it? Of course not, that is a silly human construct. It just is. Should we be thankful? Are you thankful for your existence, to be alive? I am, but to nothing in particular, just the fact that I am here experiencing this moment, irrespective of how that may have come about.

Does it make me spiritual? Yep, it sure does, because I understand that everything in existence is connected. I see myself in you and everything around me, for we are the same thing in different unique expressions of itself.

Another question. How would you go about redefining life to consider something like the earth alive?

I believe everything is conscious, because everything from the smallest quark, to the biggest galaxy all came from the same thing. If the Big Bang is true, then everything in existence was part of a single point. It is well proven in science that things that were once part of a whole remain linked, no matter how far away they are. We are all part of one thing, no matter how different our makeup, or the distance between us. The atoms in my body were once part of a star, which were once part of a gas cloud, which was once part of the big bang. The air I breathe, the water I drink, has been inhaled and drunk by every living thing on earth since life first arose on this planet. I breathe the same molecules that Aristotle did, I drink the same water as the Dinosaurs. ALL life on this planet is connected (thoughout time) on the most basic and fundamental level.

Our conception of consciousness is pedestrian, and is based on outdated but still significant beliefs that we as humans are the center of existence, and the pinacle of life in the universe. We continue to separate ourselves from nature (due mainly to science and its offspring technology) while ignoring the fundamental fact that we are part of nature, and inextricably linked to everything around us. If the universe on the largest scale is conscious, then it follows that it is also at the smallest levels, since it is all part of the same thing, all linked together though time and space. Will that consciousness take the same form? No, of couse not. Our consciousness is different than that of a cat's, or a bacteria's, or a cell's, or a rock's, or an atom's, or a planet's, or a sun's, or a galaxy's. They are different scalar levels of consciousness, woven into the fabric of existence. Greater or lesser degrees of it manifesting itself from the Planck Time's quantum foam.

Order arises out of chaos in all of observable existence. Is it possible that there is an order to consciousness that arises from natural laws?

Maybe we should see consciousness and life as two separate, yet sometimes linked phenomenon. A layer upon another layer of organization and order to the universe.

Again you must define consciousness. If consciousness can just mean anything well then yes anything could be conscious. But that kind of reasoning has no merit. Its just giving in to someone else's view point even if that view point is based on nothing at all.

Have I based my theory on consciousness being ubiquitious on "nothing at all"? Is using the best current explanations of cosmology and physics not a valid source to pull from? Does my reasoning have no merrit?

 

[burnt]

Torsion fields are still controversial, but there is some science to back them up. Particle spin proves that information travels any distance instantaneously. Take two electrons, separate them across the entire universe, and when one spins in one direction, the other will spin in the exact same way, at the exact same time. This means that information has a way to be transmitted everywhere in existence, with no delay. Membrane/Super-string theory postulates that everything is contained in a membrane, all things everywhere are connected on a fundamental level. What this would suggest is that all information is everywhere at the same time. Everything that is, was or will be is connected everywhere. What you do here, is in some medium available to something 10 billion light years away, instantaneously. The universe is one enormous information field, ie: conscious.

I dig on the enormous 'information' field because that's very close to the truth, but I don't understand why that field needs to be conscious?

Concerning particle spin. I think what you are referring to could more accurately be described as quantum entanglement. I believe also that when particles are entangled one spins up and the other down and yes this appears to be happen instantly without regard to distance. Quantum entanglement is real its been experimentally demonstrated. It has many potential uses such as with computer technology, teleportation, cryptography its a really neat phenomenon. But how does this suggest that the universe is conscious? Quantum entanglement is not happening all the time with all particles either its just one possibility of quantum states.

If they are true, the univese is one giant informational field, containing everything that has ever, is, or will ever occur. It becomes omniscient and omnipresent. Does it deserve worship? No. It just is. Does it have to actively participate in life? No. It just is. Should we anthorpomorphize it? Of course not, that is a silly human construct. It just is. Should we be thankful? Are you thankful for your existence, to be alive? I am, but to nothing in particular, just the fact that I am here experiencing this moment, irrespective of how that may have come about.

Does it make me spiritual? Yep, it sure does, because I understand that everything in existence is connected. I see myself in you and everything around me, for we are the same thing in different unique expressions of itself.

I also feel this awe about our universe. For some reason its not spiritual to me though? Maybe because I associate spiritual with super natural and since everything that happens is natural there is no supernatural and thus no spirit. I guess maybe your view is that everything is spirit so that is what nature is and all that happens is a result of this field, tao, or great spirit?

I believe everything is conscious, because everything from the smallest quark, to the biggest galaxy all came from the same thing. If the Big Bang is true, then everything in existence was part of a single point. It is well proven in science that things that were once part of a whole remain linked, no matter how far away they are. We are all part of one thing, no matter how different our makeup, or the distance between us. The atoms in my body were once part of a star, which were once part of a gas cloud, which was once part of the big bang. The air I breathe, the water I drink, has been inhaled and drunk by every living thing on earth since life first arose on this planet. I breathe the same molecules that Aristotle did, I drink the same water as the Dinosaurs. ALL life on this planet is connected (thoughout time) on the most basic and fundamental level.

True and awe inspiring.

Our conception of consciousness is pedestrian, and is based on outdated but still significant beliefs that we as humans are the center of existence, and the pinacle of life in the universe. We continue to separate ourselves from nature (due mainly to science and its offspring technology) while ignoring the fundamental fact that we are part of nature, and inextricably linked to everything around us. If the universe on the largest scale is conscious, then it follows that it is also at the smallest levels, since it is all part of the same thing, all linked together though time and space. Will that consciousness take the same form? No, of couse not. Our consciousness is different than that of a cat's, or a bacteria's, or a cell's, or a rock's, or an atom's, or a planet's, or a sun's, or a galaxy's. They are different scalar levels of consciousness, woven into the fabric of existence. Greater or lesser degrees of it manifesting itself from the Planck Time's quantum foam.

I don't see our conception of consciousness as necessarily pedestrian, limited yes, but not trivial. I do not think we are the center of existence nor the pinacle of existence. Darwinian evolution makes this perfectly clear. I guess I see it in the exact opposite way. We have been able to realize how we are all linked because of science and technology. The separation is largely based on religious ideas from mainly monotheistic religions.

Again I don't see the basis for calling a rock conscious however.

Order arises out of chaos in all of observable existence. Is it possible that there is an order to consciousness that arises from natural laws?

Darwinian evolution also gives us the mechanism by which complexity can arise out of simplicity requiring no design or intelligence.

Maybe we should see consciousness and life as two separate, yet sometimes linked phenomenon. A layer upon another layer of organization and order to the universe.

My fundamental question throughout many of my posts is why? Why is consciousness universal?

Have I based my theory on consciousness being ubiquitious on "nothing at all"? Is using the best current explanations of cosmology and physics not a valid source to pull from? Does my reasoning have no merrit?

Haha no way your reasoning has excellent merit! If it didn't I wouldn't be asking you all these deep questions. I learn from you as well. I don't mean to sound like I am lecturing. What I meant has no merit in that we clearly have a definition for what consciousness is although we may not know what it is. Just like we have a definition for why life is life and rocks are not life. Its to divide and characterize things. These concepts are just our own human constructs about the world around us but I can't just say that because someone else defines rocks as life that its correct unless they have a basis for that definition. Otherwise I can say anything about anything and it would be completely correct. That kind of reasoning gets humans into all kinds of trouble.

 

[Saidin]

I dig on the enormous 'information' field because that's very close to the truth, but I don't understand why that field needs to be conscious?

Because information it its most basic form IS consciousness!

But how does this suggest that the universe is conscious? Quantum entanglement is not happening all the time with all particles either its just one possibility of quantum states.

Because everything in existence has been quantum entangled since the moment of the Big Bang. In addition, there must be some sort of medium for that information to be transmitted someplace, no matter the distance, instantaneously. That medium also connects everything within it together inseparately.

I also feel this awe about our universe. For some reason its not spiritual to me though? Maybe because I associate spiritual with super natural and since everything that happens is natural there is no supernatural and thus no spirit. I guess maybe your view is that everything is spirit so that is what nature is and all that happens is a result of this field, tao, or great spirit?

Ahh, now we have come back full circle to the point I began many pages back. It is spiritual to me because it shows how I am part of something greater than myself. I am a unique expression of consciousness in an infinite feild of information. I am unique, yet part of a larger whole. I am a cell, living, moving, expressing, replicating in my own way, following my own free will to find meaning in my life, and that experience is contributing to something larger than myself. I am one and I am many. I do not know how my own personal expression of life adds to the greater whole, I don't need to. But if I follow my bliss, then I know that like a cell in a body, if I do what is best for me, and not harm any other cell in doing what is best for them, I contribute to the richness and operation of whatever it is I am but a fraction of.

I don't see our conception of consciousness as necessarily pedestrian, limited yes, but not trivial. I do not think we are the center of existence nor the pinacle of existence. Darwinian evolution makes this perfectly clear. I guess I see it in the exact opposite way. We have been able to realize how we are all linked because of science and technology. The separation is largely based on religious ideas from mainly monotheistic religions.

Perhaps pedestrian was the wrong word to use. Limited or incomplete would certainly be better words. I disagree, even with monotheistic religions, people were still tied to the land, subject to the whims of nature. Religion tried to tell them that something better was awaiting them after a life of such extreme hardship. Much of life was based upon the seasons, and the climate, much more intimately than they are now. It was with the advent of technology that humanity began to separate itself from the natural world and throw systems out of balance. Now many live in the comfort that only an afterlife could have once promised. Technology has eased the burden of mankind, not god. It has separated us from our roots, in my opinion to allow people to ponder the big questions, with time that did not exist as little as 2 generations ago.

Again I don't see the basis for calling a rock conscious however.

Darwinian evolution also gives us the mechanism by which complexity can arise out of simplicity requiring no design or intelligence.

If the universe is conscious, then atoms are conscious, therefore a rock would be conscious. Admittedly a very mundane and to us uninteresting form of consciousness, but a rock in itself would experience many things thoughout its "lifetime".

Are you a Star Trek fan? Ever seen the Voyager episode "Death Wish" where "Q" wants to commit suicide? They are trying to explain what it is like for an omniscient immortal being. They come to a dusty old town along an endless road. The "Q" say, well life is like a road, expanding on into infinity...sometimes you travel the road, other times you don't. I spent some time as the Dog, some time as the Scarecrow...But when you have done and been everything, life no longer has any meaning. There is experience to be had in every expression of existence, from the apparently mundane, to the omniscient. But once all that experience has been had, only by playing hide and seek with itself, can the universe not get bored...watch from 3 minutes in.

My fundamental question throughout many of my posts is why? Why is consciousness universal?

Because information is universal. Like a hologram, the whole is contained in each infintesimal part, and each infintesimal part in the whole, change the smallest concieveable bit and the whole picutre is changed. Evolution. Everywhere. Eternally.

Haha no way your reasoning has excellent merit! If it didn't I wouldn't be asking you all these deep questions. I learn from you as well. Its to divide and characterize things. These concepts are just our own human constructs about the world around us but I can't just say that because someone else defines rocks as life that its correct unless they have a basis for that definition. Otherwise I can say anything about anything and it would be completely correct. That kind of reasoning gets humans into all kinds of trouble.

Thank you. I am learning an enormous amount from this conversation as well. You have helped me to understand hard science better, as well as to think deeply about these ideas and attempt to express them in a coherent manner.

It is human nature to deconstruct everything, to caterorgize things into those with similarities and those with differences. It helps us understand the world around us better. We need those definitions, placed into words or equations to solidify them in our perceptions and understanding. They are necessary for us to understand the "how" of what we see and expreience. But there is also a grand unifying whole to creation. Some call it god (though this term is too narrow and anthropomorphized for my liking). I call it consciousness, Brahman, Tao, All That Is. It just is. Should we change our lives to try to live up to something that we don't and cannot understand? No. Should we pay it hommage? Absurd. Should we try to find that which has meaning for us, in whatever form that takes and follow it? Absolutely! But it is where the answer to "why" lies, which is a question I do not believe that science will ever be able to answer. It just is. I am thankful to be alive, to be able to ponder these questions, and to have an informational system like the internet to share and debate these ideas with others who are also experiencing the joy and mystery of what we call life.

I just thought of something, another analogy...is the Internet alive? I'd say no, but on the other hand I would say it is conscious...is it information born of consciousness or consciousness born of information? It could be both, and it is most certainly becoming the human collective consciousness, very very rapidly.

I believe that as everything is recycled, so too is consciousness. The information and expreience we have acquired in our lifetimes is not lost, it just changes form and continues on. Information becoming more and more detailed and organized...

 

[burnt]

I don't understand how you can equate information with consciousness? There are many forms of information that are not conscious. For example there are many computer programs out there that have not even the slightest inkling of being conscious yet they clearly process information. Now can an artificial conscious be created? I think so for sure but there is a difference between being conscious and not being conscious.

I also don't think that saying all particles are entangled since the moment of the big bang is correct.

My main issue is consciousness however. There are many spiritual beliefs that have this idea of a universal consciousness. I personally don't buy it. I have reasons for not buying it which I am trying to get at. But my main reason is that consciousness human consciousness anyway is a construct of the human mind. Dog consciousness is the construct of the dogs mind. How can we go from saying look at me I am conscious to look at everything, everything is conscious?

 

[Pssilocibinnn]

hello.. im new in this forum.. !!
Always I was attracted by religion, metaphysics, spirituality and things like that... from very young...
In the childhood I was atheistic .. later i was a agnostic... (It is impossible to know the unknown thing)
when i take a strong dose of mushrooms.. The whole structure of my mind was destroyed...
I start to investigating all kind of spiritual rituals and mystical informations... and i confuzed too much... Tape-worm the need to see again it...
but when i take again the mushrooms strong dose... i feel agnostisism and sceptical way is the most happiness way for my life... because the "Knowledge" of the psicodelic experience cannot be expressed by the language...
i see the imagination and creativity as the connection with the hiper space... A place without time... all the religion, spirituality or metaphysics.. They are the imagination of someone... is the same thing... and a necessary thing for the human race... for now..
the evolution is moving us out the need of faith and In the happiness of creating new things...
i bealive in that.. Surely I am wrong.. but... who cares? the most importan thing for me is feel good and creating ..
i love you burnt!!
:d :d :? :? 8) 8) 8) :x :!: :?: :evil: :twisted: :idea: :idea: :idea: :idea: :idea: :idea: :idea:
·)%(9638%6´7(%)$·&%($)·
Hapiness for all!! and sorry for my english... is so bad....

 

[burnt]

glad you enjoy the thread and welcome to the forum!

 

[Saidin]

I don't understand how you can equate information with consciousness? There are many forms of information that are not conscious. For example there are many computer programs out there that have not even the slightest inkling of being conscious yet they clearly process information. Now can an artificial conscious be created? I think so for sure but there is a difference between being conscious and not being conscious.

I also don't think that saying all particles are entangled since the moment of the big bang is correct.

My main issue is consciousness however. There are many spiritual beliefs that have this idea of a universal consciousness. I personally don't buy it. I have reasons for not buying it which I am trying to get at. But my main reason is that consciousness human consciousness anyway is a construct of the human mind. Dog consciousness is the construct of the dogs mind. How can we go from saying look at me I am conscious to look at everything, everything is conscious?

Where does the information we know about come from? Do we not write the computer programs? Do we not build the hubs, and computers, write the books, etc? Consciousness creates the information. Is it even possible to have information without consciousness?

Can consciousness arise out of information on its own? Possibly, we only have Sci-Fi to go on here. Think of the Terminator Movies...Skynet arises on its own out of the information of the internet and various programs and networks. If you've ever read Ender's Game and series by Orson Scott Card (highly recommended, lots of well written and interesting philosophical ideas presented in the series), there is a god-like intelligence which arises arises out of all the connected computers and communication networks in the galaxy. Scientists are working on Artificial Intelligence as we speak, consciousness trying to create consciousness.

I may not be correct that all particles are still entangled, but atoms and subatomic particles in fact act as if they are connected...does that translate out into the reality of our everyday experience, hard to know for sure, but the evidence points to yes. All matter was at one time all part of a single whole. All part of one, which now numbers about 10 to the 80th power atoms in the universe. Split a photon and send them away from eachother, and they will act exactly the same, and if one is changed, the other will take on those characteristics...if now, why not then? http://www.cebaf.gov/news/internet/1997/spooky.html

This also occurs with DNA that has been separated from its host. The Army did a study to see if there was a DNA/emotion connection when removed from a host. DNA was removed using a swab, and connected to a machine that allowed it to be measured electrically to see if it would respond to the emotions of the person from whom it came, who was in a different part of the building. It does. So DNA taken from our bodies responds to our emotions, meaning there is a connection where there shouldn't be any. "Everyone an Energy Healer: The Treat V Conference" Santa Fe, NM, Advances: The Journal of Mind-Body Health, vol. 9 (1993)

Once something is part of something else, it always remains so. So since all particles were part of a single thing prior to the Big Bang, they are all still quantuamly entangled.

How can we go from our consciousness to universal consciousness? Because a) everything is information. b) information can be transmitted across the entire universe with no delay. c) information arises from consciousness. Therefore everything is conscious. Different levels of consciousness? Absolutely! Consciousness more or less organized thoughout all the observable universe and beyond. It is the foundation of reality, consciousness coalescing out of the quantum foam to give form to the material world.

Quantum physics has already proven that everything we precieve is an illusion, a result of our consciousness...it does not exist out there...it is all in our heads. This is the universe at work, consciousness expreiencing itself infintely.

 

[burnt]

Where does the information we know about come from? Do we not write the computer programs? Do we not build the hubs, and computers, write the books, etc? Consciousness creates the information. Is it even possible to have information without consciousness?

What do you mean by information? If you mean things that we wrote down or thought and talked about then yes it does come from consciousness expressed by human actions. If you mean quantum information all that is, is a description of a quantum state. Its nothing to do with consciousness.

Can consciousness arise out of information on its own?

Consiousness requires the ability to interpret store and retrieve information. So no I think consciousness requires some physical structure capable of interpret sensing storing and retrieving information to exist.

I may not be correct that all particles are still entangled, but atoms and subatomic particles in fact act as if they are connected...does that translate out into the reality of our everyday experience, hard to know for sure, but the evidence points to yes.

All particles are not entangled as far as I know. I am pretty sure entanglement ends once the wave function collapses but I am not sure? Realize I don't dispute the concept of entangelment its real and it played a role in cosmological evolution and still plays a role in how subatomic particle behave. It has many practical applications. But what I am disputing is that it offers evidence for a conscious living universe. I also dispute that it offers evidence for spiritual or otherwise supernatural phenomenon.

Realize that quantum entanglement does not necessarily mean information is traveling faster then the speed of light as weird as that sounds. Seriously.

All matter was at one time all part of a single whole. All part of one, which now numbers about 10 to the 80th power atoms in the universe. Split a photon and send them away from eachother, and they will act exactly the same, and if one is changed, the other will take on those characteristics...if now, why not then?

You don't split photons. If you create a pair of photons from another particle they will be entangled and when one is measured the information about the other is known instantaneously. Again I am not a physicist I can't pretend to have a complete understanding of this.

Concerning cosmological evolution the role of entanglement presents some interesting questions. A detailed discussion of this can be found here:

http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0904/0904.2300v1.pdf

This also occurs with DNA that has been separated from its host. The Army did a study to see if there was a DNA/emotion connection when removed from a host. DNA was removed using a swab, and connected to a machine that allowed it to be measured electrically to see if it would respond to the emotions of the person from whom it came, who was in a different part of the building. It does. So DNA taken from our bodies responds to our emotions, meaning there is a connection where there shouldn't be any. "Everyone an Energy Healer: The Treat V Conference" Santa Fe, NM, Advances: The Journal of Mind-Body Health, vol. 9 (1993)

Ok this is too much. I don't believe this. I also don't trust pseudoscientific journals. I can't find that Army study. If you can provide it I will read it. There are lots of people these days who make journals just to make it seem like they are doing real science.

I found a study however:

http://www.heartmath.org/research/ri-structural-changes-in-water-dna-associated-with-new-physiologically-measurable-states.html

This kind of study is total bullshit. All they are doing is measuring DNA's UV absorbance in solution after people focus "intention" on it. Total junk in my opinion. I could do this and get any result I wanted.

Once something is part of something else, it always remains so. So since all particles were part of a single thing prior to the Big Bang, they are all still quantuamly entangled.

Like I said all particles I do not think are entangled for reasons mentioned above. If the big bang is correct its meaningless to say that anything was part of anything before the big bang. There is no such thing as before.

How can we go from our consciousness to universal consciousness? Because a) everything is information. b) information can be transmitted across the entire universe with no delay. c) information arises from consciousness. Therefore everything is conscious. Different levels of consciousness? Absolutely! Consciousness more or less organized thoughout all the observable universe and beyond. It is the foundation of reality, consciousness coalescing out of the quantum foam to give form to the material world.

a) again what do you mean by everything is information?

b) The information required for consciousness cannot be transmitted across the universe without delay. Also remember quantum entanglement while does connect particles in a way that it happens instantaneously does not actually mean that any information is traveling faster then the speed of light (as weird as that sounds).

c) your making a circle.

So your saying that everything is information and that all information is everywhere and consciousness causes information? Your just making a circle where there doesn't need to be one.

What is required to have consciousness is not just random particles coalescing out of quantum foam but a system in which information can be stored process retrieved. Our consciousness is a continuum of information coming in through our sense being stored and retrieved and processed. Our consciousness doesn't make the tree it makes the picture of tree that we see in our mind.

Quantum physics has already proven that everything we precieve is an illusion, a result of our consciousness...it does not exist out there...it is all in our heads. This is the universe at work, consciousness expreiencing itself infintely.

I am going to end on saying that I do not think its appropriate to use quantum mechanics to suggest that there is such thing as a universal conscious. Quantum mechanics does not prove such a thing exists. At all. This is the spiritual myth being pushed by so many people out there today who have barely any understanding of quantum mechanics. Some of these people are physicists who know more mathematically then I do but they are on the fringe making science into sensationalism and spiritualism for their own agendas. Something I don't think its appropriate either as it confuses the public even more about science.

Here is an appropriate article that briefly overviews this myth:

http://www.colorado.edu/philosophy/vstenger/Quantum/QuantumConsciousness.pdf

 

[Phlux-]

 

[burnt]

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[Saidin]

What do you mean by information? If you mean things that we wrote down or thought and talked about then yes it does come from consciousness expressed by human actions. If you mean quantum information all that is, is a description of a quantum state. Its nothing to do with consciousness.

For information I mean, data in any stage of processing. Every atom in the universe has a beginning, a current and a future, it has a history, it is data in a stage of processing. Light also is information. We get information about the state of stars (composition, temperature, age, size, brightness) and galaxies that have been in transmition in some cases for billions of years. That light holds information. The universe is one giant complex of information (light). But in a quantum state there is information as well, all possibilities yet to be realized...an infinity of information waiting to be made manifest.

Consiousness requires the ability to interpret store and retrieve information. So no I think consciousness requires some physical structure capable of interpret sensing storing and retrieving information to exist.

So therefore by this definition computers would be conscious. They have a physical structure that is capable of interpreting, sensing, storing, and retrieving information. All living things would be conscious as well by this definition, from cats, to trees, to bacteria.

Is the universe not a physical structure? IF the universe is a giant hologram, or all part of an interconnected membrane, then it has all the qualities of a computer. It interprets informaion, stores it, and can retrive it, as well as changing when new imputs are added.

All particles are not entangled as far as I know. I am pretty sure entanglement ends once the wave function collapses but I am not sure? Realize I don't dispute the concept of entangelment its real and it played a role in cosmological evolution and still plays a role in how subatomic particle behave. It has many practical applications. But what I am disputing is that it offers evidence for a conscious living universe. I also dispute that it offers evidence for spiritual or otherwise supernatural phenomenon.

I am not sure either, any quantum physicists around? :d If they show the characteristics of the subatomic level in the larger reality we experience, then they are all still entangled from the smallest to the largest. Information can then be transmitted anywhere at superluminal speeds. Every particle could have access to what every other particle has ever, or will ever experience. It means that everything is still connected on the most fundamental level, all infintesimal parts of a larger whole, that in actuality we are all individual parts of one consciousness experiencing itself.

Realize that quantum entanglement does not necessarily mean information is traveling faster then the speed of light as weird as that sounds. Seriously.

Not necessarily, but in all likelihood as that is what the evidence suggests. Also, please explain how that information is not being transmitted instantly. You say it doesn't but all the research I've seen does not support what you are saying.

Ok this is too much. I don't believe this. I also don't trust pseudoscientific journals. I can't find that Army study. If you can provide it I will read it. There are lots of people these days who make journals just to make it seem like they are doing real science.

This kind of study is total bullshit. All they are doing is measuring DNA's UV absorbance in solution after people focus "intention" on it. Total junk in my opinion. I could do this and get any result I wanted.

So some Academic journals are "proof", but others are nonsense? I don't understand...

How is the study total bullshit? They proved that DNA's UV absorbance in solotion changed after people focused intention upon it. It was not the solution they held in their hands, it was solution in a different container in a different room, which showed the changes at the exact time that people were focusing, providing significant evidence for a psychokenetic connection of DNA when removed and separated from the host by sight and distance.

a) again what do you mean by everything is information?

b) The information required for consciousness cannot be transmitted across the universe without delay. Also remember quantum entanglement while does connect particles in a way that it happens instantaneously does not actually mean that any information is traveling faster then the speed of light (as weird as that sounds).

c) your making a circle.

So your saying that everything is information and that all information is everywhere and consciousness causes information? Your just making a circle where there doesn't need to be one.

What is required to have consciousness is not just random particles coalescing out of quantum foam but a system in which information can be stored process retrieved. Our consciousness is a continuum of information coming in through our sense being stored and retrieved and processed. Our consciousness doesn't make the tree it makes the picture of tree that we see in our mind.

a)see above.
b)how can you know this and make this statement? If changes to one are affected to another, across space, without delay, how is this not faster than the speed of light? It proves that there is a medium in which changes can manifest at superluminal speeds.
c) I am not being circular. Everything is light/energy/information, which is conscious.

The universe is a physical system in which information is stored, processed and recieved. The universe is a continuum of light/energy/information coming through itself and being stored, processed and retrived (whether consciously or unconsciously). How much of the information we are subject to in our daily lives are we consciously aware of? 1%? .01%? .0001%? Smaller? Certainly not larger!

I am going to end on saying that I do not think its appropriate to use quantum mechanics to suggest that there is such thing as a universal conscious. Quantum mechanics does not prove such a thing exists. At all. This is the spiritual myth being pushed by so many people out there today who have barely any understanding of quantum mechanics. Some of these people are physicists who know more mathematically then I do but they are on the fringe making science into sensationalism and spiritualism for their own agendas. Something I don't think its appropriate either as it confuses the public even more about science.

Science always has been and always will be confusing for the non-scientist. So...some quantum mechanical physicits are postulating this "myth/theory", while others are disputing it? It is not appropiate for a scientist to use their field of expertise to try to answer the big questions, just because it may provide proof of something that ontological materialism finds untenable? Could their "own agendas" be that of truth finding? Trying to explain the nature of existence with a new theory that is not accepted by "classical" physicists? Is it because they are not strict cosmological darwinists and "Brights" that their theories are dismissed and pushed into the "frige" category? I don't understand your logic. It is the "I don't agree with them, therefore they cannot possibly be right" argument. Nobody has all the answers, therefore nobody can lay sole claim on the "truth"

Science is not in danger. There is no possibility of it being diluted to insignificance, unless there is undenyable proof of a greater consciousness, and even then science would still provide the answers to "how, when, where", irrespective of "why". Science in my opinion will never be able to answer "why", that is something left to ourselves to ponder. One can choose to ponder the question or not, it does not make a difference. But to say that there are some questions people should not consider, just because we currently have no way to prove them, and that to even consider it lessens us all as a species, is a bit condescending in my opinion.

Here is an appropriate article that briefly overviews this myth:

http://www.colorado.edu/philosophy/vstenger/Quantum/QuantumConsciousness.pdf

An interesting, if outdated article. Written before String/Membrane theory became prevalent, and therefore many of his assertions are no longer valid, and some evidence has emerged to prove the things he discredits. I'll look for some other articles about quantum consciousness to try to provide more sound evidence for my assertions of everything being an illusion.

 

[burnt]

I won't be responding here for a while but good discussion hope to continue in the future. :d

 

[Saidin]

Yeah, sorry for the delay in responding to your last post...I was out of town for a few days. Am really enjoying the discussion as well, looking forward to your continued input in teh future! 8)

 

[Saidin]

I found some interesting talks and articles on Quantum Physics. Some are explain our current knowledge, some indicate where that knowledge may lead us.

Eight Dimensions of Elementary Particles (Quantum Physics graphed, no math)

http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/garrett_lisi_on_his_theory_of_everything.html

Can fractals make sense of the quantum world?
30 March 2009 by Mark Buchanan

Can fractals make sense of the quantum world?

Many of the predictions of quantum theory seem too weird to believe, but the mathematics of fractals could help them make sense, says Mark Buchanan

www.newscientist.com

What string theory is really good for.
01 June 2009 by Jessica Griggs

What string theory is really good for

Its detractors say string theory is little more than cosmological pseudo-science, but it might help us understand how mystery materials like high-temperature superconductors work

www.newscientist.com

It's confirmed: Matter is merely vacuum fluctuations
20 November 2008 by Stephen Battersby

It's confirmed: Matter is merely vacuum fluctuations

The apparently solid stuff is no more than fluctuations in the quantum vacuum, fiendishly complex calculations confirm

www.newscientist.com

Hope you enjoy, I'll keep my eyes out for other articles that may be of interest and pertinent to the discussion we are having.

 

[burnt]

I am going to start a new thread to continue this discussion so incase members who don't want to read all this will have a chance to contribute. The topic will shift from religion to spiritualism and quantum mechanics.