Consciousness the Source of gravity

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the idea that consciousness may be the source of gravity, positing that gravity arises from the curvature of space influenced by consciousness. Participants explore the relationship between consciousness and energy, suggesting that consciousness could be a fundamental aspect of reality that interacts with gravity. Some argue against this notion, asserting that gravity is a prerequisite for consciousness to exist, rather than the other way around. The conversation touches on philosophical implications, including the nature of reality and the role of perception in understanding gravity. Ultimately, the thread highlights the complexity of linking consciousness and gravity, emphasizing the need for further exploration in both physics and philosophy.
  • #31


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?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32


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


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
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


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?
 
  • #36
Originally posted by Iacchus32
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:
Are you saying that there would be no point to our existence if we weren't AWARE of it? If so, then you have supported my case for the consciousness of the Universe.

I think everything is aware, at the very least, of its own existence ...to SOME degree, however rudimentary.
 
  • #37
Originally posted by M. Gaspar
Are you saying that there would be no point to our existence if we weren't AWARE of it? If so, then you have supported my case for the consciousness of the Universe.

I think everything is aware, at the very least, of its own existence ...to SOME degree, however rudimentary.
Yes, I would agree, if based upon everything being a part of the Greater Mind as a whole ... where the notion of the Greater Mind gives even more credence to the relationship between gravity and consciousness.

Oh, check out some of my recent posts concering the nature of spirits. Beginning with my post The Heart of Reality and continuing with my dialogue with heusdens.
 
  • #38
Am here. I do expect that my situation was understood on my limitations at accesing the net, and it is appreciated. I would hope too to reply at various reactions addressed to me, but I guess I could try contain it at a certain length of the thread once in a while. Thanks.

Can you please explain me, how do you come to know that consciousness? [/QUOTE]

...By breathing, then contemplating about it...[zz)]

Whose consciousness are you talking about? Is there a collective consciousness, or a universal consciousness, that permeates everything? And how does this affect gravity?

With the capital C, or rather that contains the wholistic perspective of what you have mentioned. Well, I did mention this before during that moment at chat, it affects because it "feels heavy" .

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?

In the theory, E is constant

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.


Er, excuse me, but this could be a classic example of closemindedness. I don't think the established belief system that the world is supposed to 'bask' nowadays don't account much anyway, it would be an illusion to assume that the supposed established systems monopolize the concept of reality; but neither would it be rendered not part of Reality in general, perhaps just the erroneous parts of some subjective manipulations that make use of it, like for example, materialism. In another viewpoint what would a drain towards a greed oriented system, commercialized culture, hypocriciy of mercantile morality, bigotry from belief systems, slave and desert based mentality would answer for my personal inquiries? It does not provide much.

The argument seems to discuss about the manifestations, but I was referring to the source of the manifestation. you were referring to the term "other way around". It requires one to be an observer to state it. Hence your consciousness was required to confirm the information.

I think he froze up...

As soon as he reboots ask for the exact value of pi.

Hey I'm on a hot tropical country. Actually I had been to the capital city but its green house effect aftermath at night didn't make me comfortable so I immediately went back to my place Davao for fresher breeze. Good thing though, there was a typhoon and a seeming coup attempt days after I left[actually it wasn't a coup, it was a radical resort of some idealistic army guys who are disgruntled at the suspected corruption and attempt to mimic a local version of 'war economy' of the armed forces here;(I wonder how you deal the latter in your country)by the way it ended peacefully].

If the only answer you'd expect is 3.1416, what is there to ask?

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

1. I could have wanted an emoticon more exciting than the one chosen, but that's the only stuff i got .

2.Solipsism?I was referring to "Consciousness" not "I".

3. I think it would be up to a person to decide for that, not you( now that would be worth thanking


Edit: What, beyond information, is consciousness?

Energy? in its eloquent pattern?


Well I did try to reply, I guess the rest had been flowing well on. On a perspective I guess it also goes that on certain sitations,the individual has to seek the musings personally within himself/herself because sometimes that's the way some insights could be revealed.
 
  • #39
First, pi is 4 times arctan 1. Yes, exactly.

Second, the US Army has never mutinied. We had a whole lot of states that seceded, and a lot of the army officers went with them. In that case we fought a four year war and beat them.

Everybody assumes government here is corrupt, and nobody really cares that much. Just so the roads get paved and social security gets paid.
 
  • #40
Hi again . I've been browsing at the diverse comments in this thread, and I hope to try to share views and reactions whenever I can, so it would be appreciated that it would be understood if my postings would seem rather irregular.

First, pi is 4 times arctan 1. Yes, exactly.

Second, the US Army has never mutinied. We had a whole lot of states that seceded, and a lot of the army officers went with them. In that case we fought a four year war and beat them.

Everybody assumes government here is corrupt, and nobody really cares that much. Just so the roads get paved and social security gets paid.

Well ok. I seem to find the word 'arctan' a bit exotic though, is that an ET language? Anyways, I can search on the net the definiton of it. But I find pi, other than 3.1416, rather interesting.

Even when I'm not american, people here tend to do research about your country's history because oftentimes our information resources like encyclopedias tend to be made in US of A. But I think it is important for each individual to struggle for what is better for humanity, whether from what country one is in-as an Earth citizen protecting the planet. It's not an excuse to just 'not care' as long as things were met, it could be a drain that will drag everything down eventually. I guess that's also one of the reason why these views are shared, to keep us aware that we have capacity, or at least try to.

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.

I tend to see that the 'mass' of Consciousness, as manifestations of it, are virtually everything that we see: the monitor, table, trees, clouds, sun, planets...Light in its most basic phenomenon, transmit the information and datas and eventuaally it is a synchronicity of such diverse and complex patterns as its manifestation, relative and interconnected.


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.

"to see the universe in a grain of sand
and heaven in a wild flower
hold infinity in the palm of your hand
and eternity in an hour" -William Blake
(am not sure whether some are the exact words though)

I'd also like to add about the diference of my views to solipsism. Solipsisim seems to start with the mind. however I tend to view the mind as a tool of Consciousness, though a very important one. Consciousness, as the source of energy patterns, is in the realm beyond the tool. Hence I refer to Consciousness, in general not just the "I". Of course the "I" has gravity too, and also a profound manifestation of Consciousness intimately connected.

There was also that mention about "ANOTHER ATTRACTIVE FORCE"? I tend to agree with it. It's what 'balances' the reality the dimension, or rather some sort of denominator. It's the 'imbalance' of it that sets the certain 'existence', like the remainder of matter-antimatter, of a dimension (I believe in multiple dimensions).

With regards to the mention of 'free energy'. I knew of a friend who's into it and even when we're countries and cultures apart, our discussion of views are interestingly similar. I guess the concept of 'free energy', like the use of magnets on such technlogy, may not necessarily be 'perpetual', but rather the benefits derived from it would virtually provide 'free' energy to last thousands , or millions of years. However I guess he'll have more knowledge about it.

My discussion of Consciousness may also be going on from the relation to gravity, to concept beyond this dimension. Will try to discuss about it when I get the availability. Till then.
 
Last edited:
  • #41
arctan is the standars abbreviation for arc tangent, the functional inverse of the trigonometric function tangent. Sometimes arctan is also written tan-1.

In words, the arctangent of a number is the angle whose tangent is that number. Arctan 1 is 45o, or in dimensionless value [pi]/4.
 
  • #42
Originally posted by selfAdjoint
arctan is the standars abbreviation for arc tangent, the functional inverse of the trigonometric function tangent. Sometimes arctan is also written tan-1.

In words, the arctangent of a number is the angle whose tangent is that number. Arctan 1 is 45o, or in dimensionless value [pi]/4.

ok thanks. nice of you to have a comprehensive knoweldge on the technicalities of arctan.
 
  • #43
Originally posted by rocket art
I tend to see that the 'mass' of Consciousness, as manifestations of it, are virtually everything that we see: the monitor, table, trees, clouds, sun, planets...Light in its most basic phenomenon, transmit the information and datas and eventuaally it is a synchronicity of such diverse and complex patterns as its manifestation, relative and interconnected.
I'm with YOU on this ...that everything may be a "form" of the energy that is consciousness. However, if we are trying to "detect" conscious -- or its EFFECT -- we must either think in terms of "substance" (measurable mass) ...or a DETECTABLE, MEASURABLE and PREDICTABLE effect that consciousness has -- not as a "material" but as part of a "causal process." Maybe consciousness -- like light -- is both a particle (substance that is intrinsic to all things)AND a wave (an energy and/or force that is influential to all things).

rocket art: you were online when I started this. How are things in the 3rd world?
 
  • #44
Perhaps what you have required on the EFFECT, may be in reference to the observer-observed phenomenon. Consciousness may not be in the terms you refer to as measurable, because it is beyond that. If the reference is on the measurable, then it may be the realm of MEMORY, such as occurence from the past and so its documentation. I perceive that Consciousness may be beyond what is detectable, measurable, is because from the totality of the mass that we observe, our process on being its observer encompasses beyond the observed(i.e. the perceived universe), hence the phenomenon of Gravity.

Light is considered to be a conscious, but nonthinking entity. However the concept of Consciousness may be beyond the particle and wave concept, it's still a manifestation of Consciousness. However memory can be referred to as measurable.

With regards to your inquiry, I could specifically inform about the country I'm in. It's a strategic location and could affect the whole region in general. Our day-to-day living is otherwise alright, but there's seeming tension with the recent shakeup. Our internal affairs are somehow complicated, and it would be prudent that we deal with it ourselves. However it's getting known here that outside forces are trying to manipulate our internal concerns for its own interests that don't care much about our concerns, and we consider its corruption contemptible.
 
Last edited:
  • #45
A little update on my assertions about thoughts and mass

Hey all, just for the record, I was doing a little checking on my argument that since thoughts contain information, thus energy, they must have a gravitational field and mass. The concept of mass has changed a little bit and really becomes a matter of definition. I was working from the concept of mass being that thing that produces gravity. Now it seems that we remain with the concept of energy. But by the following discussion in the theoretical physics forum, we do have gravity with every thought. I think we can still argue for mass as well.

This is the response to the question: Can we argue for gravity solely on the basis of the energy of the photon?

quote from Marcus
but you said "gravity solely on the basis of the energy of the photons" and that is not quite right, it is gravity solely on the basis of the energy density and PRESSURE of the photons.

But for crying out loud light has almost no pressure at all, so let's neglect it!

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=56039#post56039

Some homework has been done to confirm that this is a correct interpretation of current theory...good since 1916.
From jcsd after doing some homework:
Yep, Marcus the phtons of the universe defintely contribute to it's mass and the gravitational attraction, and yes it is related to the pressure exerted by light (the classic analogy is to consider a sealed box, containing photons, on a set of weighing scales).This wouldn't hold true for two parallel beams of phtons as they are acting in the same direction tho'(I'll try and get the correct equatins soon)>


I don't mean to hijack the thread, but I wanted to point out that although alternative models are discussed, this interpretation agrees with General Relativity and the consensus.

It seems that thoughts [ideas] have mass and gravity.
 
Last edited:
  • #46
Originally posted by rocket art


"to see the universe in a grain of sand
and heaven in a wild flower
hold infinity in the palm of your hand
and eternity in an hour" -William Blake

(am not sure whether some are the exact words though)

got a thrill
but Blake wrote metrically (eg. tetrameter and trimeter)
and "universe" has 3 syllables-----two too many---
so I copied this from the Oxford Book of Quotations

"To see a World in a Grain of Sand,
  And a Heaven in a Wild Flower,
Hold Infinity in the palm of your hand,
  And Eternity in an hour."

William Blake born in 1757 same year as Mozart I think.
Also he evidently believed in what we call "multiple universes"
because he said "a World" instead of "the universe". cool guy.

I trespass into this thread because Ivan alerted me that
he had quoted me to the effect that it is not just energy that
shapes spacetime (effectively causing gravity) but also concentrations of pressure do it. pressure attracts just as energy does. the RHS of the main equation of GR is called the "stress energy tensor" and it combines quantities of energy density and quantities of pressure.

Ivan thanks for being so considerate. You are welcome to quote me in Philosophy forum if and when you think proper. But I cannot be a participant because it would scatter my already scattered wits to the four winds.

metric matters in Blake
I am thinking it should scan like this 4-3-4-3
no verse has an absolute metrical pattern but
various rhythmical possibilities grow out of verse and
here is one such

"To SEE a WORLD in a GRAIN of SAND,
  And a HEAV'N in a WILD FLOWer,
Hold inFINiTY in the PALM of your HAND,
  And eTERniTY in an HOUR."

duh DAH/ duh DAH/ duh duh DAH/ duh DAH
duh duh DAH/ duh duh DAH/ DAH duh
duh duh DAH/ duh DAH/ duh duh DAH/ duh duh DAH
duh duh DAH/ duh DAH/ duh duh DAH

iamb, iamb, anapest, iamb
anapest, anapest, trochee
anapest, iamb, anapest, anapest
anapest, iamb, anapest

Einstein's 1916 equation of GR is often written
as the curvature tensor G is equal to the stress-energy tensor T
either with the "mu, nu" or "m, n" subscripts as

Gmn = Tmn

or without the subscripts simply as

G = T
 
Last edited:
  • #47
got a thrill
but Blake wrote metrically (eg. tetrameter and trimeter)
and "universe" has 3 syllables-----two too many---
so I copied this from the Oxford Book of Quotations

"To see a World in a Grain of Sand,
And a Heaven in a Wild Flower,
Hold Infinity in the palm of your hand,
And Eternity in an hour."

Hi. Just as I thought, somehow there's a word left when I tried to remember it, so there it was. My time's limited here as to accessing the net for checking it on search engines, so thanks.


metric matters in Blake
I am thinking it should scan like this 4-3-4-3
no verse has an absolute metrical pattern but
various rhythmical possibilities grow out of verse and
here is one such

"To SEE a WORLD in a GRAIN of SAND,
And a HEAV'N in a WILD FLOWer,
Hold inFINiTY in the PALM of your HAND,
And eTERniTY in an HOUR."

duh DAH/ duh DAH/ duh duh DAH/ duh DAH
duh duh DAH/ duh duh DAH/ DAH duh
duh duh DAH/ duh DAH/ duh duh DAH/ duh duh DAH
duh duh DAH/ duh DAH/ duh duh DAH

iamb, iamb, anapest, iamb
anapest, anapest, trochee
anapest, iamb, anapest, anapest
anapest, iamb, anapest



With regards to poetry, I also find it interesting to compose some. Years ago my works were also chosen and had been a Fellow to a National Writers Workshop here. Last year our art group had an island wide exhibit and my contribution was entitled "Contents in a Box of Patterns". It was a box with about more or less 15 small paintings inside with a corresponding poem each. it was actually inspired with my being a physics enthusiast, and with the postulation I presented. The community here though needed much exposure regarding these. However the poems I wrote were written in such a way that no technical physics terms were used, but simple words, and it's good to be aware that some viewers take notice of the ESSENCE of it.

However on my empirical viewpoint at writing poetry, I do not find it encouraging to be bridled by technical aspects of writing, and prefers it to be that way. Such technical terms may be quiet useful in such endeavors as science because it is a language tool used. However the communication of Art is not primarily about technicalities but rather the ESSENCE of an individual's expression. To see it on the technical rather than on the essence will be barking at the wrong twig.

Any attempt to bridle Art with technicalities (it is to be perceived a tool not an institution, and it is the individual's perogrative to responsibly deal with it), I can assure that sooner or later someone will deconstruct it. Not that technicalities are unnecessary, but rather it was not the issue. Art will always be beyond technicalities. However in literary fields, it would be understandable that such measurements would materialize as words are patterns in itself, provided that the Essence of a literary work is not stifled or disregarded in the process. However it will be the writer's prerogative.

I would rather that we talk on poetry or Blake's perspectives about its Essence and such World, or flower, or a sand grain, rather than on tetrameters or iambs. I believe that's what Blake's soul wanted it to be.

I believe that Consciousness isn't necessarily controlled by pattern (rather more of a guide), but rather pattern follows the needs of Consciousness.

On the other issue, I tend to like the discipline of composing Haiku on 5-7-5 syllables. Here Consciousness
chose to follow pattern.

Einstein's 1916 equation of GR is often written
as the curvature tensor G is equal to the stress-energy tensor T
either with the "mu, nu" or "m, n" subscripts as

Gmn = Tmn

or without the subscripts simply as

G = T

This is more apt as to the use of technical stuffs on science issues.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Consciousness and the Perception of Time
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
6K
Why Do We Still Not Know the Reason Behind Gravity?
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
A A Question on the TOV Limit: Continuous Forces vs. a Discrete Trigger
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
891
  • Sticky
How to use the "w" in www
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
4K
Discussion on the science-literature relationship and more
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
A Thermodynamic Approaches to Quantum Gravity: Discussion
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Some more vague questions about consciousness.
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
I've been feeling lost as of late.
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Could the Laws of Physics Be Proportional to Entropy?
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
339
Writing: Input Wanted "Spacetime Drive" idea for sci-fi series of shorts
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K