Consciousness the Source of gravity

  • Thread starter rocket art
  • Start date
  • #1
rocket art
37
0
Hi science folks. As conversed from the previous topic "WHAT IF there is no God..", and due to 'insistent demand' ,here is my postulation. It occurred during a candid discussion we once had about 2 years ago at a physics chatroom when someone inquired what gravity is, but then I noticed that answering it had been like going in circles, so eventaully this postulation surfaced as my answer.

I had preferred to be into art, and I had been finding interest on physics while doing some personal searching. I tend to be an independent thinker, so maybe some of my ideas aren't necessarily on the books, but I believe, and by experience, those who had also been aware will notice it. Although I don't have much on the technicalities of the physics language, however I had been finding it interesting as a language tool to express what otherwise had been abstract or visual musings on my part. With regards to my being a physics enthusiast I could rather express through some basic languages, so it would be of interest for us to understand better on sharing views, to speak on a language "simple enough for a child to understand, and profound enough to confound a king." (-rocket)

I don't often access the internet though(consider it some of 3rd world blues), so I would encourage folks to go on discussing the issue while time and dimes are being chased over here; however whenever possible I will see to visit this thread. It's also admirable at the way science scrutinizes flakes in a concept, so it would be encouraged (just don't hide on closemindedness). It would be interesting to share ideas when it is perceived from different endeavors and angles, the view could be more panoramic.

Here it is:


Gravity is said to be caused by the curvature in
space. but it seemed like a chicken-egg dilemma.

In the theory it's squared the speed of light in
mass and mass is present in the curvature. Among perceivers of eastern philosophy it’s been said that Consciousness is in the realm of C^2. The realm of matter cannot bound it for matter cannot reach lightspeed (I postulate it just duplicates, but that’s another story). It is not even enough to contain it just in a boundary of a space-time dimension or by limits of machinations (Materialism seemed to be an attempt at manipulating objectivity for someone’s subjective motive, rather than perceiving its environment as relative to one another). Consciousness can pierce the barrier beyond it or lightspeed. Consciousness is vital in space and time; the Observer.

There is the core source of Gravity. To
a profound degree Consciousness is within that core,
the source of curvature, mass created by it,
and gravity is the manifestation of the presence of Consciousness.


“The boundaries of one’s universe may not be outside the individual, but within him/her.” – rocket
 
Last edited:

Answers and Replies

  • #2
M. Gaspar
679
1
Processing...
 
  • #3
heusdens
1,736
0
Can you please explain me, how do you come to know that consciousness?
 
  • #4
M. Gaspar
679
1
Processing...
 
  • Haha
Likes paradisePhysicist
  • #5
Iacchus32
2,313
1
Whose consciousness are you talking about? Is there a collective consciousness, or a universal consciousness, that permeates everything? And how does this affect gravity?
 
  • #6
Mr. Robin Parsons
1,256
0
To the best of my knowledge, gravity is a function of energy, the same energy that is what composes matter, and that is not quite the same energy that is what is consciousness, caaaaaause, if it was, we would have found human consciousness, by now, as we can detect those kinds of energies.

Simple enough?
 
  • #7
Dissident Dan
237
2
More new-age silliness. Consciousness is a complex process of many different parts. Consciousness needs other stuff, including gravity, to exist, not the other way around. If it wasn't for gravity already existing, the environmental conditions for organisms to develop would not exist..just ever and fastly expanding matter and light would be the state of things.
 
  • #8
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
8,010
1,010
Somebody reboot M. Gaspar

I think he froze up...

As soon as he reboots ask for the exact value of pi.
 
  • #9
heusdens
1,736
0
1. Can someone disable these *blinking* avatars, and can it be set as a rule that *blinking* avatars are not done.

2. Shall we explain to Mr. Rocket Art that he has a perception of reality that is nothing less then that of Solipsism, and that actually the world exists outside of his mind also?

3. M. Gaspar. You can stop processing now. Thanks.
 
  • #10
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
8,010
1,010
From a purely objective point of view, I don't think we can rule out the possibility that if ever understood in a philosophical way, the seat of consciousness and gravity are, in a very profound way, the same thing. To a point I can even make a physical argument for this now. The Maxwell’s Demons paradox is resolved with the realization that information is energy. Surely information relates to consciousness; therefore this aspect of consciousness has mass.

Until we have a complete M [or now I read N?] or Grand Unified Theory, we can't really speak to the essence of either energy or consciousness. Even then we may find that enlightenment eludes us.

Edit: What, beyond information, is consciousness?
 
Last edited:
  • #11
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
8,010
1,010
Originally posted by heusdens
1. Can someone disable these *blinking* avatars, and can it be set as a rule that *blinking* avatars are not done.

You can go to your user options and disable avatars.
 
  • #12
Kerrie
Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
841
15
Originally posted by Ivan Seeking
From a purely objective point of view, I don't think we can rule out the possibility that if ever understood in a philosophical way, the seat of consciousness and gravity are, in a very profound way, the same thing. To a point I can even make a physical argument for this now. The Maxwell’s Demons paradox is resolved with the realization that information is energy. Surely information relates to consciousness; therefore this aspect of consciousness has mass.

Until we have a complete M [or now I read N?] or Grand Unified Theory, we can't really speak to the essence of either energy or consciousness. Even then we may find that enlightenment eludes us.

ivan, you have an eloquent way of stating things in a simple yet objective manner...perhaps this theory is considered new age silliness because of the intangibleness of consciousness?
 
  • #13
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
8,010
1,010
Originally posted by Kerrie
ivan, you have an eloquent way of stating things in a simple yet objective manner...perhaps this theory is considered new age silliness because of the intangibleness of consciousness?

Ah shucks



It just struck me that even though what rocket art said sounded far fetched, I recognized an element of truth from a particularly interesting physics lecture from college.

I don't think we have even come close to terms with QM, GR, and the implications for our view of reality. I think we rightly resist such drastic perturbations in our world view.
 
Last edited:
  • #14
Dissident Dan
237
2
Originally posted by Ivan Seeking
From a purely objective point of view, I don't think we can rule out the possibility that if ever understood in a philosophical way, the seat of consciousness and gravity are, in a very profound way, the same thing. To a point I can even make a physical argument for this now. The Maxwell’s Demons paradox is resolved with the realization that information is energy. Surely information relates to consciousness; therefore this aspect of consciousness has mass.

Sure, information relates to consciousness. Consciousness is mass moving around. Now where does the consciousness creates gravity part come in?


Until we have a complete M [or now I read N?] or Grand Unified Theory, we can't really speak to the essence of either energy or consciousness. Even then we may find that enlightenment eludes us.

Why not? Are you saying that we must know everything before we can know anything? That's a rediculous paradox which means that you can know nothing, not even the paradox itself or that you know nothing.

[/b]
Edit: What, beyond information, is consciousness? [/B]

Consciosness is the process of experiencing.
 
  • #15
Iacchus32
2,313
1
Originally posted by rocket art
“The boundaries of one’s universe may not be outside the individual, but within him/her.” – rocket
Hmm ... Gravity as a source from within ...
 
  • #16
Iacchus32
2,313
1
What is so intangible about consciousness? That's what bugs the carp out of me! I mean no offense, but without consciousness, how would we even know that we exist? And what would there be to discuss then? Hmm ... that seems to give a lot of "gravity" to the situation right there. :wink:

Yes, I think it would be fair to say that consciousness is "the ground" of our true being. And that's gravity man! :wink:
 
  • #17
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
8,010
1,010
Originally posted by Dissident Dan
Sure, information relates to consciousness. Consciousness is mass moving around. Now where does the consciousness creates gravity part come in?

It can be shown that information, as opposed to random bits, can do work. If you review the paradox of Maxwell's Demon's - sorry if this is obvious but I'm not a philosopher by education - we find that structured information contains energy. This is a fundamental relationship that must be true regardless of how it is created and stored. This is akin to a second law argument about why a free energy machine can't work. I don't care how the machine is supposed to work, by the 2nd law I know that it can't. If information exists, so must stored energy and therefore gravity. This revelation solved a 100 year old paradox in physics.

Edit: I should say that the paradox was about information and energy. The gravity part comes from GR.

you can know nothing

We can only imagine incomplete physical models to explain what is observed. Without a GUT we can never know if they are really correct or merely feeble imposters that may or may not even satisfy our sensibilities.

Consciosness is the process of experiencing.

I don't know how the gravitational field of consciousness happens, but I understand that it must. This at least is my understanding of the state of the physics to this effect. My head grows heavy with all of this talk of information.
 
Last edited:
  • #18
Iacchus32
2,313
1
Yep, without gravity we couldn't stand upright. And neither could the soul, without consciousness! :wink:

So, perhaps consciousness is the metaphysical counterpart to gravity? ... Or, gravity itself?
 
  • #19
selfAdjoint
Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
6,881
10
Originally posted by Ivan Seeking
What, beyond information, is consciousness?

Well some philosophers make a big distinction between our apperception of qualia and cognition. They give examples like Nagel's What is it like to be a Bat. You can know all about bats - have as much information on the subject as you like - but that doesn't call up in you the sense of what it's like to be a bat.

Or there's the color theorist Mary, who suffers from an eye disease that makes her see the world in black and white. She's the world expert on color science, has all the information about colors, but she can't SEE colors.

By the way, I really liked your maxwell's emon argument that information is equivalent to (free) energy and hence has equavalent mass. I wonder how that affects the information problem of black holes.
 
  • #20
heusdens
1,736
0
Originally posted by Iacchus32
Yep, without gravity we couldn't stand upright. And neither could the soul, without consciousness! :wink:

So, perhaps consciousness is the metaphysical counterpart to gravity? ... Or, gravity itself?

Perhaps it's your consciousness that keeps the planet Earth in orbit?
 
  • #21
zoobyshoe
6,551
1,287
Approaching the question exclus-
ively philosophically, has it
ever been conclusively determined
that that which we are not aware
of can accurately be said not to
exist?

If the answer is yes, then gravi-
ty, as we know it, was created
when we became conscious of it.
Philosophically it has been re-
created multitudes of times, each
time a sentient being stopped
taking it for granted and inte-
grated the information that things
fall DOWN, not up or sideways, into it's future behaviour and
planning.

The answer, philosophically, might
also be no. I would be very, very,
very surprised if any convincing
and complete physics answer turned
out to be yes.
 
  • #22
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
8,010
1,010
Originally posted by selfAdjoint
Well some philosophers make a big distinction between our apperception of qualia and cognition. They give examples like Nagel's What is it like to be a Bat. You can know all about bats - have as much information on the subject as you like - but that doesn't call up in you the sense of what it's like to be a bat.

Or there's the color theorist Mary, who suffers from an eye disease that makes her see the world in black and white. She's the world expert on color science, has all the information about colors, but she can't SEE colors.

Even the "I" concept has structure. I would think that as soon as i conceive of I, "I" has gravity. This seems like a stretch but I am trying my best to stay within the confines of the proof that I saw. Ordered data can do work; random data can't. This was the key concept of the lecture.


By the way, I really liked your maxwell's emon argument that information is equivalent to (free) energy and hence has equavalent mass. I wonder how that affects the information problem of black holes.

I want to stress that there is nothing free. In fact, this proof resolves an apparent violation of the 2nd law...or do I misunderstand you here?
 
Last edited:
  • #23
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
8,010
1,010
I would think that chemical energy in the form of food is ultimately converted to information energy.
 
Last edited:
  • #24
selfAdjoint
Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
6,881
10
Originally posted by Ivan Seeking


I want to stress that there is nothing free. In fact, this proof resolves an apparent violation of the 2nd law...or do I misunderstand you here?

Uh, yes you did. Maxwell's demon is an entropy reducer. The modern explanation is that he is a free (as opposed to fixed) energy consumer, and one of the charactistics of entropy is reduction of free energy in this sense. A different meaning of "free".

My motto (refusing to pay subscriptions online) Information wants to be free. And I want it to be free too.
 
  • #25
M. Gaspar
679
1


Originally posted by Ivan Seeking
I think he froze up...
Do you mind if I have a LIFE?

As soon as he reboots ask for the exact value of pi.
I'm more interested in the exact value of this thread.

I'm not sure I can relate to anything that been said here, so I'll go off on my own tangent...

If the Universe is ALL ENERGY ALL THE TIME -- which I believe it is, regardless of the "form" that energy takes...

AND if consciousness is a "form" of energy -- but NOT the "form" that is baryonic matter -- then it probably has NO MASS, hence NO GRAVITY per se...at least, not the "attractive de facto force" that CONNECTS all baryonic matter.

HOWEVER, my thought is that there is a corollary "force" that acts upon and interconnects consciousness ...which exists, at varying levels, in every bit of baryonic matter (from elementary particles to large dynamic coherent systems) ...hence there is ANOTHER ATTRACTIVE FORCE that pulls things together in the Universe.

This "consciousness network" would be the conduit through which "information" is transmitted between, well, ALL THINGS.

This is why I say that the Universe MAY BE a living, conscious Entity that's responsive to all of Its parts.

Now, of course, some/most believe that "dead matter" eventually combined with enough complexity to ignite and generate consciousness. But I say consciousness is a basic ingredient of the Universe, having existed in the Primal Singularity before It went through Its (most recent) Big Bang.

SO, I believe that consciousness DOES exert a "form" of gravity, if you will.

Happy now?
 
  • #26
M. Gaspar
679
1
Originally posted by Dissident Dan
Sure, information relates to consciousness. Consciousness is mass moving around. Now where does the consciousness creates gravity part come in?
Consciousness MAY have "mass" but it would probable be so subtle as to be indetectable to instrumentations designed to detect effects in the physical realm. However, I think we might be able to "see" its "tracks" ...that is, the EFFECT that INTENTION (ans ASPECT of consciousness) might have on the physical plane.

Why not? Are you saying that we must know everything before we can know anything? That's a rediculous paradox which means that you can know nothing, not even the paradox itself or that you know nothing.
Phenomena only APPEAR to be paradoxes until they are understood.

Consciosness is the process of experiencing. [/B]
More precisely -- IMO- consciouness is the process of "AWARENESS" through which experience is "ingested". (Sorry, I'm still honing my speculations, and have not fully developed my lexicon. Work with me.)

Note: an elementary particle would have a "lower level" of awareness than a bug ...we more than the bug ... a star more than us ...and the Universe more than a star.

Probe ...and I will reply.
 
  • #27
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
8,010
1,010


Originally posted by M. Gaspar
Do you mind if I have a LIFE?

sorry I brought it up.
 
  • #28
M. Gaspar
679
1


Originally posted by Ivan Seeking
sorry I brought it up.

Oh No...

Ivan Seeking: Have you never been flippant??

I've been LOLing all night -- intermittently, of course -- at your "I think he froze up" remark ...while suspecting that you might not get my humor.

So at 3:50 am: I apologize ...not in a PM, but in front of the class.

I have nothing but respect for YOU -- and everyone here -- and will try to curb my rudeness in the future ...but then you'll never get to know the "real me".

Second chances?


Edit: BTW: I have no life.
 
Last edited:
  • #29
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
8,010
1,010


Originally posted by M. Gaspar
Second chances?

a second chance a thousand times

My apologies. I did take this as a rub. Some people find me really annoying. :smile:

Of course if they didn't, I wouldn't be doing my job.


Edit: BTW: I have no life.

Edit: I think I have a Socrates complex!
 
Last edited:
  • #30
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
8,010
1,010
Originally posted by selfAdjoint
Uh, yes you did.

ooops.


Maxwell's demon is an entropy reducer. The modern explanation is that he is a free (as opposed to fixed) energy consumer, and one of the charactistics of entropy is reduction of free energy in this sense. A different meaning of "free".

My motto (refusing to pay subscriptions online) Information wants to be free. And I want it to be free too.


You went right over me I think. I may know what you mean but lack the familiariy with the language...or not... Could you elaborate a little?
 
  • #31
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
8,010
1,010


Originally posted by M. Gaspar
AND if consciousness is a "form" of energy -- but NOT the "form" that is baryonic matter -- then it probably has NO MASS, hence NO GRAVITY per se...at least, not the "attractive de facto force" that CONNECTS all baryonic matter.

Could you get me up to speed on this? My understanding is that energy warps space-time which is gravity which is mass which is energy... Tom was objecting [I think] to a statement that I made about photons. I was told that until we have a QM theory of gravity, if we can... ...we can make no distinction between mass and mass energy. By this we can correctly assume a photon mass of hμc-2. This is consistent with GR and that’s all we can really say. Is this correct...or is this a view that is now heavily out of favor?
 
  • #32
M. Gaspar
679
1


Originally posted by Ivan Seeking
a second chance a thousand times
Does this mean I get to insult you 2000 times?

Edit: I think I have a Socrates complex! [/B]
What might this mean?
 
  • #33
M. Gaspar
679
1


Originally posted by Ivan Seeking
Could you get me up to speed on this? My understanding is that energy warps space-time which is gravity which is mass which is energy... Tom was objecting [I think] to a statement that I made about photons. I was told that until we have a QM theory of gravity, if we can... ...we can make no distinction between mass and mass energy. By this we can correctly assume a photon mass of hμc-2. This is consistent with GR and that’s all we can really say. Is this correct...or is this a view that is now heavily out of favor?

I'm afraid I must defer to my "betters" on this ...which includes Tom and practically everybody ELSE. You see, I am merely a humble right-brained panpsychist who likes to connect the dots. The dots, however, must be supplied by somebody else.

However, I will say that I use the term "de facto force" as a nod to the warping of space-time that, apparently, has the EFFECT of drawing matter together.
 
  • #34
Iacchus32
2,313
1
Yes, but doesn't consciousness give gravity to our being? For without it, what would we be? Certainly not conscious, and aware that we exist! :wink:
 
  • #35
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
8,010
1,010


Originally posted by M. Gaspar
Does this mean I get to insult you 2000 times?

Well, I can say that only one other person has insulted me over 2000 times...and I married her.


What might this mean?

Sometimes I seem to think that it is my job to argue that we can know nothing. Come to think of it, we have hemlock growing around here. Tea anyone?
 

Suggested for: Consciousness the Source of gravity

Replies
1
Views
242
  • Last Post
Replies
24
Views
944
  • Last Post
Replies
8
Views
671
  • Last Post
Replies
4
Views
754
Replies
18
Views
684
  • Last Post
Replies
2
Views
692
Replies
10
Views
672
  • Last Post
Replies
17
Views
717
  • Last Post
Replies
7
Views
389
Top