Do 'we' see the world as we assume it exists?

[Guybrush Threepwood]

Originally posted by olde drunk
Guybush believes that what he observes is really there, apart from him. i believe that what is out there is a reflection of what is inside here(me, pointing to my heart).

so am I inside there too?

 

[pelastration]

Originally posted by onycho
Sorry for the mixup. My posts should have been directed pelastration as he is the one with ideation of matter creation. My apologies.

You gave an excellent example of the essence of this thread: "Do we see the world as we assume it exists?"
You assumed that Guybrush and myself were one ... because you were focusing on something different. If you mixed and combined the two different visions of Guybrush and myself then you had a strange and mixed interpretation and overview of what was said. Maybe you should read again the posts Guybrush and myself did ... and re-interpret them ... now as written by two different persons.

 

[pelastration]

Si I wrote: "So our view of reality is related to such internal zap-system in each human. Once this is important (food), next second another thing (sex) is important ... then: pain in finger, then telephone, then ..."

Originally posted by onycho
The limits of the human mind in constructing our view of reality theories are finite.

Can you explain? You mean the human mind is limited? Sure.

Originally posted by onycho
Flexible membranes with infinite streching abilities marking the borders of our universe are much like a mist which disppears with the coming of daylight.

Sorry ... this is written like a paradox ... of course that can be real fun.
Can you rephrase your message? Or is there no message?

IMO it has nothing to do with the logic image I gave about: The internal zap-system in each human.

 

[onycho]

Palastration or Castration says:

"If you mixed and combined the two different visions of Guybrush and myself then you had a strange and mixed interpretation and overview of what was said.

pelastration, you make my apology to another poster as some kind of proof of your strange understanding of the universe. You place the onus on me for a 'mixed interpretation and overiew' of your convoluted and harebrained internal zap-system theory.

Take a deep breath, relax and come down from your imaginary trip to the moon.

 

[onycho]

"Si I wrote: "So our view of reality is related to such internal zap-system in each human. Once this is important (food), next second another thing (sex) is important ... then: pain in finger, then telephone, then ..."

WHAT IS A SI? What are you rambling about?

---The limits of the human mind in constructing our view of reality theories are finite.

"Can you explain? You mean the human mind is limited? Sure."

Even Einstein and Boehr attempted to create a unifying field theory which is inherently impossible without being able to leave our Earth point of reference where all known physics and QM do not function or explain everything.

---Flexible membranes with infinite streching abilities marking the borders of our universe are much like a mist which disppears with the coming of daylight.

"Sorry ... this is written like a paradox ... of course that can be real fun. Can you rephrase your message? Or is there no message?"

My message is very clear. When you attempt to use Einstein or other great thinkers work to fabricate your own ideations, then without evidence your theories are like that mist which disappears when looked in the light of day.

"IMO it has nothing to do with the logic image I gave about : The internal zap-system in each human."

FYI the following site will give you a little insight into the sheared flow stabilization experiments in the ZaP flow Z-pinch.

http://www.aa.washington.edu/AERP/ZaP/index.html

 

[pelastration]

Originally posted by onycho
Palastration or Castration

That's enough.

 

[onycho]

.Olde drunk says

---What makes inanimate particles think?

"hmm, within our perspective, imho, they do not think.."

Actually there is now scientific evidence to the contrary. Remember the two split experiment with which many are so familiar? The following experiment has been replicated many times by different investigators with the same inexplicable results. Read the following paragraphs to understand this always occurring event in which atoms have some innate Wisdom of their own.

A gun is able to fire one atom every hour at a plate with photographic emulsion on surface. If an atom hits the plate it makes a spot on the film. If a solid plate is placed in front of the back emulsion film, any atom striking the front solid plate is stopped and seen no more. If the atom happens to pass through the slit on the front plate it continues to the photographic emulsion.

When only one slit is open, the gun continues to fire one atom an hour and a large number of spots accumulate on the emulsion and one can notice the expected fuzzy diffraction pattern. Now if the first slit is closed and open a second slit in the front solid plate, the repeated atom firings produce the same pattern but offset by the distance that separates the the two slits. The atoms are producing the diffraction pattern characteristics of waves passing through a narrow harbor opening.

Now when both slits are opened and again the gun fires one atom at a time the individual atoms no longer land randomly within the usual diffraction pattern. Instead they fall only within the specific "allowed' regions where the light bands of the interference pattern appear and never in the dark band regions. Seems reasonable doesn't it?

But wait! This cannot be. A single atom was fired at a time. There is no other atom, be it wave or particle with which to interfere and cancel each other. Yet the interference pattern occurs and the dark bands appear. A single particle can only go through one of the slits. Already noted that atoms going through the single slit falls everywhere with the diffraction pattern with none of the alternating light and dark bands that result from the interference of waves at the emulsion screen. Although both slits are open, and still firing only one atom at a time,it must travel to only one of the two slits and go through that slit. If the other slit is closed it lands anywhere within the diffraction pattern. If the other slit is open, it never lands in the dark (forbidden) regions originally seen in the interference pattern which developed when there were two slits open.

The atom is a single entity, with a fixed locality. In its passage through one slit, why should opening or closing the other slit have any effect upon its passage? How can it "know' if the second slit is open or closed? But it does know! Somehow the atom is aware of its environment.

The identical results are obtained with firing single photons. Photon particles of light that travel at the speed of light, the now considered maximum speed attainable in our universe. Even if the photon is infinitely extended, in the time it travels from the photon gun to the open slit it cannot have 'felt' the second slit, check to see if that second slit was open or closed, communicated that information to the portion passing through the first slit and then decided where on the screen it was permitted to land and where it was forbidden. There was no time for the feeler to make the round trip.

This is bizarre.

Attribution: Gerald Schroeder, Ph.D. in physics MIT.

 

[Rader]

just a thought

Originally posted by onycho
.Olde drunk says

---What makes inanimate particles think?

"hmm, within our perspective, imho, they do not think.."

Actually there is now scientific evidence to the contrary. Remember the two split experiment with which many are so familiar? The following experiment has been replicated many times by different investigators with the same inexplicable results. Read the following paragraphs to understand this always occurring event in which atoms have some innate Wisdom of their own.

Onycho, just a thought here i had. If the micro world is dominated by quantum mechanics, there is contained in it, all fixed localities. Then within the diffraction pattern of alternating light and dark bands there is contained all the possibilities of fotons that would exist. By shooting single fotons we see what the laws in our universe allow us to. The fotons creating the cancelling out, to create the diffraction pattern of alternating light and dark bands, would then be what the laws of our universe do not allow us to see. This would be a sort of evidence that a muliverse could exist and mutiple realities inside a Reality. If two fotons are shot instead of one, then two are recorded?, this indicates that we create our realtiy through ovservation. It is said, water will not boil if not observed.
What other inovated ways has this ixperiment been done? I have been trying to think of alternative explanations.

 

[onycho]

Originally posted by Rader
Onycho, just a thought here i had. If the micro world is dominated by quantum mechanics, there is contained in it, all fixed localities. Then within the diffraction pattern of alternating light and dark bands there is contained all the possibilities of fotons that would exist. By shooting single fotons we see what the laws in our universe allow us to. The fotons creating the cancelling out, to create the diffraction pattern of alternating light and dark bands, would then be what the laws of our universe do not allow us to see. This would be a sort of evidence that a muliverse could exist and mutiple realities inside a Reality. If two fotons are shot instead of one, then two are recorded?, this indicates that we create our realtiy through ovservation. It is said, water will not boil if not observed.
What other inovated ways has this ixperiment been done? I have been trying to think of alternative explanations.

Radar that's just it as there is no proof that the world, the universe or any other dimension is dominated by quantum mechanics. QM appears to explain a paradox first enunciated by Einstein et al. (1935), who proposed a thought experiment that appeared to demonstrate quantum mechanics to be an incomplete theory. The usual view of quantum mechanics says that a wave function determines the probabilities of an actual experimental result and that it is the most complete possible specification of the quantum state. Einstein et al. believed the predictions of quantum mechanics to be correct, but only as the result of statistical distributions of other unknown but real properties of the particles.

You say that this is 'some sort' of evidence that multi-universes
could exist and that multiple realities can exist in other realities. I do not believe that we create reality by observation but that reality creates our perspective of things as we assume them to exist.

The experiment I mentioned is a paradox in itself as there is no QM that can explain the observed phenomena of individual particle thought or Wisdom. QM does not deal with the SAS particle which cannot be deduced by any mathematical formula or ideation of an esoteric ability of the particles that seem to make a construct which has free choice.

 

[Rader]

Originally posted by onycho
Radar that's just it as there is no proof that the world, the universe or any other dimension is dominated by quantum mechanics. QM appears to explain a paradox first enunciated by Einstein et al. (1935), who proposed a thought experiment that appeared to demonstrate quantum mechanics to be an incomplete theory. The usual view of quantum mechanics says that a wave function determines the probabilities of an actual experimental result and that it is the most complete possible specification of the quantum state. Einstein et al. believed the predictions of quantum mechanics to be correct, but only as the result of statistical distributions of other unknown but real properties of the particles.

You say that this is 'some sort' of evidence that multi-universes
could exist and that multiple realities can exist in other realities. I do not believe that we create reality by observation but that reality creates our perspective of things as we assume them to exist.

The experiment I mentioned is a paradox in itself as there is no QM that can explain the observed phenomena of individual particle thought or Wisdom. QM does not deal with the SAS particle which cannot be deduced by any mathematical formula or ideation of an esoteric ability of the particles that seem to make a construct which has free choice.

Yes i have been investigating this. Einstein et al,(1935), I leave this interesting site.
http://www.spaceandmotion.com/Wolff-Einstein-EPR-Experiment.htm
Take alook at Experimental Proof of the Spherical Standing Wave Structure of Matter.

Quantum Theory (1900-1930) discovered four main things;
a) Both matter and light sometimes behave as particles and sometimes behave as waves. (Planck, de Broglie)
b) Schrödinger's Standing Wave equations can be used to describe the allowed discrete energy states for electrons (Wave-Centers) in atoms or molecules.
c) It is impossible to know both the location and momentum of a particle and this inherent uncertainty can be calculated using the square of the Wave equation to determine the probability of where the particle will be found. (Heisenberg, Born)
d) Matter seems to be subtly interconnected with other matter in the Universe. (EPR Experiment)

To be found.TOE
e)gravity incorporatd
f)SAS function found
g)Consiousness explained

The Einstein, Podolsky, Rosen (EPR) experiment performed by Aspect in 1972 famously and controversially confirmed the apparent instant interconnection of particles and contradicted Einstein's Relativity which requires that all matter to matter interactions be limited by the velocity of light. Einstein is in fact correct, the error of the experiment was to assume matter was a particle rather than the Wave-Center of a Spherical Standing Wave. Once this is understood then it explains how matter is subtly interconnected with other matter in the Space around it (by the In and Out-Waves) and leads to a minor change in the experiment which will confirm the Metaphysics of Space and Motion and the Spherical Wave Structure of Matter as a sensible and obvious solution to the problems and paradoxes of not only Quantum Theory, but also of Einstein's Relativity and Cosmology.

Most books do not explain Einsteins in depth view of QM, they just brush it off, saying he did not like it or want to accept it..

A consciousness would seem to explain the EPR experiment.
http://citeseer.nj.nec.com/dewolf00quantum.html
http://citeseer.nj.nec.com/context/40008/0
8)]

 

[ambient]

I must apologize to all,

I have not read all the posts in
this forum, and perhaps someone
has already addressed the point
I am about to bring up.

In my opinion, due to improper use
of the word perception, a lot of
pointless arguments are being brought
forth.

You see, perception is nothing more
than our interpretation of empirical
and objective reality. Empirical reality
absolutely can not be altered through
our perception, however it can be interpreted
the way we choose.

You may create a wormhole in your imagination and
travel billions of light years to visit other
worlds, but it is only real for you, not for
others, because you choose to interpret the reality
that way. You can interpret reality as allowing
dragons and goblins to exist, but it won't change
the reality for others. And even if you do change the
reality in your head, the effects will be more
damaging than constructive. Because a constructed
reality is nothing more than an illusion.

In fact, the "perception is reality" approach is practiced by
terminally ill and others seeking to escape reality -
it is called meditation. "See the healing light and
find your cave," - helps those people to free themselves
of pain (temporarily). But does it rid them of their
tumor, illness, or parasites? No, it does not.

Being able to alter the reality is the ultimate dream of
any man. It is the same as being God.

Be patient, one day it will be possible. Not through
metaphysics, but through nanotehnology.

 

[Merlin]

old reality is no reality

This is the only thing that you may be sure of. Reality is an illusion. We "see" reality as a construct, not as it really is. This is because we are in step lock with reality is before we observe / cause the collapse of the wave function. We see old "reality".

 

[onycho]

Originally posted by Ambient

You see, perception is nothing more
than our interpretation of empirical
and objective reality. Empirical reality
absolutely can not be altered through
our perception, however it can be interpreted
the way we choose.

Ambient you are basically correct that human perception can neither change nor alter objective reality. But you must first define 'reality.'

As one might be able say that our 'reality' is in truth only an illusion that our cognition assumes exists. IF there is in reality a timeless dimension where nothing really exists except a consciousness flow of some 'freewill' that for a short period of fixed time within this timelessness observes our universe with all of its particles and apparent laws of physics.

Then it is not our 'perception' that affects reality but just the opposite.

Either way, this is a metaphysics thread and cannot be validated one way or the other.

Our culture defines our concepts of the fear of death and dying. Unlike meditation or forms of transendental or reincarnations the perception of reality may truly dictate what we humans consider to be real and observable. Reality then would be nothing more or less than a creation in a void by force or forces unknown.

And then again, maybe not...

 

[ambient]

To Merlin:

It is very curious, and in a way disturbing, how
quantum physics has become more of a "new age"
philosophy for some.

I am not going to attack your opinion, but if
you are trying to look at quantum physics as
science you cannot abandon one thing that is
essential to any science - scientific rigor.

I have talked about it on another forum, but I
will say it again. Due to the fact that the
first definition of uncertainty was poorly
worded, the definition allowed for those who
read into the context to think that wave function
collapses once we try to measure it.

But do you just rely on that archaic badly
worded definition, or the clarification that
has since been provided by many scientists.

The uncertainty principle essentially is used
to describe wave/particle duality, not prescribe
our consciousness the attributes it does not
possess.

Also, if you do read scientific publications on
quantum physics and mechanics, you would know
that at least at this point quantum physics is
used solely to describe properties and interaction
of atomic and subatomic particles.

TRYING TO EXPLAIN EVERYDAY PHENOMENON LIKE GRAVITY,
TRAJECTORY OF AN OBJECT, ACCELERATION, BY THE MEANS
OF QUANTUM PHYSICS IS TOO COMPLEX TO BE PRACTICAL.

The rules of classical physics that are used to accurately
describe the interaction between objects, cannot be used
to describe the properties of subatomic particles accurately,
and vice versa.

In no way the uncertainty principle does suggest
that our consciousness collapses the wave function. Only
if you really try to read the definition the way you want.

What stirs up this confusion is our lack of complete understanding
of particle/wave duality of matter.

We do not construct the objective reality, it is always there,
it is not affected by our consciousness in any way. If our
civilization ceases to exists, it does not mean that the
universe will cease to exist. If you die, the people around you,
and the universe, do not!

I said it before, I will say it again - you can interpret reality
the way you choose, but it does not make your interpretation
real. Nazi's believed that they were a superior race, there were
millions of people who believed that, but did it make it so? Not
in the least. Militant Muslims believe that they will go to Heaven and live with 70 virgins there if they sacrifice themselves and kill
infidels. But do they end up in heaven with 70 virgins? I doubt that.
(I am not trying to stir up a religious debate here, just making a
point). Communists believed in bright future of equality and
conformity, but you can see that it didn't work either.

What was wrong with the groups mentioned in the above examples?
They all refused to accept objective empirical reality and tried
to create their own skewed one.

I can go on and on with examples of how departing from sober
and objective look on reality can be destructive.

However, I believe I have shown enough evidence to make my point.

Cioa.

 

[olde drunk]

which reality?

somewhere, near the beginning of this thread, i believe i asked that we define the reality we are discussing.

there is a physical reality that we share and this has laws of science to explain its behaviour. in all probability it is a form of electro-magnetic energy that we agree to experience as being physical.

another reality is what we experience. you and i can interact with the same physical objects and yet have a totally different experience with them. let's agree to have a catch with the exact same ball. (we will put aside the question of whether or not it is) now, i think playing catch is a complete waste of time, is so easy to do (throw and catch) that i have a miserable time. you, wanting to hone your skills, know that you can get better for your up-coming game. you enjoy the exercise and practice.

like the muslims, you believe you will play better in that game. whether you do or not is questionable.

so we percieve/experince our individual reality based on what we believe. hopefully, from there, we learn how to adjust our beliefs for a future reality that is more enjoyable as it expands.

the interplay of beliefs and reality are very complex. i chose to participate in a catch because i believed that i was helping you, but, believing that it was a waste of time i was unhappy. within the belief of practice makes perfect, what do you do, if you play and make 3 errors? no virgins for you!

we agree that the physical world is here, but it is our beliefs that color our experience of the physical and and non-physical universes. if we load in the probability of reincarnation, we can see how all the universes expand and there is no waste of time or energy. our poor muslim may not get his virgins, but he may be able to reason more clearly in another life. without linear time, he may even be another casualty of 9-11.

are we treading close to religion ban? if so i'll demur. IMHO, religion is what we believe. what should be discouraged is discussions of the various 'organized religions'.

the only truth is that there ain't no truth.

 

[onycho]

Originally posted by Olde Drunk

"there is a physical reality that we share and this has laws of science to explain its behaviour. in all probability it is a form of electro-magnetic energy that we agree to experience as being physical."

Why must experiencing reality be a form of electro-magnetic energy? Why could it not be some form of giant dimensional holograph in which our state of consciousness experiences reality?

"...another reality is what we experience. you and i can interact with the same physical objects and yet have a totally different experience with them..."

Why must we interact with anything physical when the nature of 'things' maybe nothing more or less in which our individual consciousness awareness' presuppose a universal reality?

"are we treading close to religion ban? if so i'll demur. IMHO, religion is what we believe. what should be discouraged is discussions of the various 'organized religions'."

In the irreducible complexity that our conscious finds for the formation of presumed life here on earth, the farther man finds himself from any organized religion or belief and simply finds a master designer which is necessary for whatever we exist in.

 

[olde drunk]

isn't a holograph a form of energy??

imho, we interact with the physical world and other entities to expand our awareness. if we are energy, this expansion enables us to manipulate this energy to a greater extent.

the more we become self-aware the more we can do.

we are in process, each to their own individual goal. along the way, we assist others and they assist us. perhaps the conciousness of rocks, plants, etc also agree to participate. i got to believe that a chicken, born into a chicken mill, is aware that it will exist briefly to be food.

from another post, earlier, i do not wish to invest time contemplating their conciousness. i have enough trouble understanding and developing my own.


YES, it is very possible that we are the gods of the universes that we create. and once created we release them to do as they see fit.

to me, the physical world is a play ground. we come, play (perhaps for many lives), learn and move on. at times, i feel that we are just now(in linear time) leaving kindergarden.

life is a game to be played, respectfully.


have fun!

 

[onycho]

Originally posted by olde drunk

isn't a holograph a form of energy??

Einstein says that all particles are interchangeable with energy and vice versa. But does that mean that a hologram is electro-magnetic energy?

imho, we interact with the physical world and other entities to expand our awareness. if we are energy, this expansion enables us to manipulate this energy to a greater extent. the more we become self-aware the more we can do.

In 1982 a remarkable event took place. At the University of Paris a research team led by physicist Alain Aspect performed what may turn out to be one of the most important experiments of the 20th century. You did not hear about it on the evening news. In fact, unless you are in the habit of reading scientific journals you probably have never even heard Aspect's name, though there are some who believe his discovery may change the face of science.

Aspect and his team discovered that under certain circumstances subatomic particles such as electrons are able to instantaneously communicate with each other regardless of the distance separating them. It doesn't matter whether they are 10 feet or 10 billion miles apart.

Somehow each particle always seems to know what the other is doing. The problem with this feat is that it violates Einstein's long-held tenet that no communication can travel faster than the speed of light. Since traveling faster than the speed of light is tantamount to breaking the time barrier, this daunting prospect has caused some physicists to try to come up with elaborate ways to explain away Aspect's findings. But it has inspired others to offer even more radical explanations.

http://www.earthportals.com/hologram.html

we are in process, each to their own individual goal. along the way, we assist others and they assist us. perhaps the conciousness of rocks, plants, etc also agree to participate. i got to believe that a chicken, born into a chicken mill, is aware that it will exist briefly to be food.

I believe that that all the particles in this presupposed universe don't communicate or participate with each other but in reality are a part of a greater Wisdom which comes from an ultimate designer. To really understand what I am saying you should read the short article at the Earth portal site above.

from another post, earlier, i do not wish to invest time contemplating their conciousness. i have enough trouble understanding and developing my own.

Don't feel like the Lone Ranger...

YES, it is very possible that we are the gods of the universes that we create. and once created we release them to do as they see fit.

I have to respectfully disagree with you on this one. We "EXPERIENCE" but we do not "CREATE" and by definition cannot be gods or sub-deities.

to me, the physical world is a play ground. we come, play (perhaps for many lives), learn and move on. at times, i feel that we are just now(in linear time) leaving kindergarden.

Do you have any reason to believe that the world is our playpen? To believe in reincarnation or that we are in the process of learning (in any linear time) is to me no more than ego-centric thinking.

life is a game to be played, respectfully. have fun!

To me life is neither a game nor for playing. Although we are allowed to experience existence, I believe that we are here for a very different reason. A reason that no one on this dimensional plane can understand with any degree of certainty.

This, says Bohm, is precisely what is going on between the subatomic particles in Aspect's experiment. According to Bohm, the apparent faster-than-light connection between subatomic particles is really telling us that there is a deeper level of reality we are not privy to, a more complex dimension beyond our own that is analogous to the aquarium. And, he adds, we view objects such as subatomic particles as separate from one another because we are seeing only a portion of their reality.

Such particles are not separate "parts", but facets of a deeper and more underlying unity that is ultimately as holographic and indivisible as the previously mentioned rose. And since everything in physical reality is comprised of these "eidolons", the universe is itself a projection, a hologram.

In addition to its phantomlike nature, such a universe would possesses other rather startling features. If the apparent separateness of subatomic particles is illusory, it means that at a deeper level of reality all things in the universe are infinitely interconnected. The electrons in a carbon atom in the human brain are connected to the subatomic particles that comprise every salmon that swims, every heart that beats, and every star that shimmers in the sky. Everything interpenetrates everything, and although human nature may seek to categorize and pigeonhole and subdivide, the various phenomena of the universe, all apportionments are of necessity artificial and all of nature is ultimately a seamless web.

In a holographic universe, even time and space could no longer be viewed as fundamentals. Because concepts such as location break down in a universe in which nothing is truly separate from anything else, time and three-dimensional space, like the images of the fish on the TV monitors, would also have to be viewed as projections of this deeper order. At its deeper level reality is a sort of superhologram in which the past, present, and future all exist simultaneously. This suggests that given the proper tools it might even be possible to someday reach into the superholographic level of reality and pluck out scenes from the long-forgotten past. What else the superhologram contains is an open-ended question. Allowing, for the sake of argument, that the superhologram is the matrix that has given birth to everything in our universe, at the very least it contains every subatomic particle that has been or will be -- every configuration of matter and energy that is possible, from snowflakes to quasars, from blue whales to gamma rays. It must be seen as a sort of cosmic storehouse of "All That Is."

 

[olde drunk]

oh boy!

let's debate! i believe that we are in constant communication with and within the universe! how else can we explain those particles at opposite ends of the universe 'immediately' changing spin or charge to accommodate a change in the other?

who has greater wisdom FOR YOU, than you? yes, it would be reassuring to have a god-figure there to guide and protect. but a true god would have to cut the apron strings at some point. we call that good parenting where i come from. i would give my right arm to protect my children from the risks of the world. but guess what? I CAN'T PROTECT THEM! in fact, i might be cheating them of their opportunity to grow and learn. nah, if i can think of this on the human level, I'm sure a god would on a cosmic level. s/he/it has turned us loose, with love and guidance and whatever else we might need to explore the universe.

here goes, we 'create' the experiences we have. our imagination creates new worlds and i suspect that those worlds create new worlds. within this context, the word 'universe' seems limiting. we and our worlds are infinite. also, i do believe that we create all of our reality. we hold certain beliefs, and psychically send these thoughts out to those that are sharing Earth at this time. we attract those that want to play with those thoughts, and we are attracted to them. now together we all create our 'mass reality'. most of us get lost trying visualize our individual mind/conciousness bringing together all the atoms and molecules necessary to make a brick. i don't think we know enough, yet, to understand how we do create that brick, but we each do(imho).


i have tried the serious, heavy view of the world. i didn't enjoy it. every thought and/or decision became more important than the last. believing that i create my reality/experience would have driven me crazy (no comments please). so, logically, i decided to have the ultimate confidence in myself that no matter what decision i made, it was the best one. this removed the need to worry over my next thought and led to a lighthearted view of playing at life. do not get me wrong, i am not a dillitant(sp?). i have values and beliefs, but they are like my clothes, when they no longer fit or get uncomfortable, i change.

the experience that i have gives me the information on how these views are working for me. hey, I'm only here for short time, may as well have fun!

isn't it egocentric to believe that our life has a greater purpose/meaning?? why can't we just be here to expand our individual conciousness in our own simple, individual way??

let's play!

 

[Thallium]

Originally posted by olde drunk
isn't it egocentric to believe that our life has a greater purpose/meaning?? why can't we just be here to expand our individual conciousness in our own simple, individual way??

You are a strange little man

I have not the time enough to speak my thoughts of the other things you said bu the paragraph in the quote was too interesting to neglect. It is not, in my humble opinion, egocentric to believe there is a greater purpose for the existence of Men. This belief if, I feel, a desperate idea we cling to with our hearts, fists and flesh. If there would be a reason, that reason must have been to oppose something, to develop something for a "final". And if there would be a final, there would be an end to it. Then again, supporting the idea of a purpose of our existence depends on whether you believe in eternity or finity. For if there was a climax and an ending to this purpose, finity would exist. I hope that was not way off the mark for the debate you asked for. A rather long digression, but I am open for other views.

 

[onycho]

GREAT TO DEBATE

Originally posted by olde drunk

let's debate! i believe that we are in constant communication with and within the universe! how else can we explain those particles at opposite ends of the universe 'immediately' changing spin or charge to accommodate a change in the other?

The problem is that this concept remains theory. Unless you have access to experimentation that definitively proves particles simultaneously communicate across the universe, it remains unknown.

who has greater wisdom FOR YOU, than you?

I really don't know...

yes, it would be reassuring to have a god-figure there to guide and protect. but a true god would have to cut the apron strings at some point. we call that good parenting where i come from.

WHY would you think that a master Creator has to do anything that we humans believe should be?

i would give my right arm to protect my children from the risks of the world. but guess what? I CAN'T PROTECT THEM!

Are you a master Creator of all things with independent unknowable Wisdom?

in fact, i might be cheating them of their opportunity to grow and learn. nah, if i can think of this on the human level, I'm sure a god would on a cosmic level. s/he/it has turned us loose, with love and guidance and whatever else we might need to explore the universe.

Correct... Why must we be children of a master Creator? If you were able to create complex thinking organisms from your vantage point, would these organisms be your kids and would you want the best for them? If humans had infinite Wisdom, we would most certainly be gods but believe me, we do not...

here goes, we 'create' the experiences we have. our imagination creates new worlds and i suspect that those worlds create new worlds. within this context, the word 'universe' seems limiting. we and our worlds are infinite. also, i do believe that we create all of our reality. we hold certain beliefs, and psychically send these thoughts out to those that are sharing Earth at this time. we attract those that want to play with those thoughts, and we are attracted to them. now together we all create our 'mass reality'. most of us get lost trying visualize our individual mind/conciousness bringing together all the atoms and molecules necessary to make a brick. i don't think we know enough, yet, to understand how we do create that brick, but we each do(imho).

Which new worlds did we create in or with our imagination?

Here is the old chicken and egg conundrum. We live in a dimension where we perceive time, space, gravity, emotions and everything our senses assumes exist. Did we create ourselves out of nothing or from our imagination? Could there be timelessness with a master Creator who has always existed in this singularity with total Wisdom. (Just like the particles that we find to have their own innate wisdom.) We create bricks and Mars Landers but did we do that because we are all knowing? I don't think so.

i have tried the serious, heavy view of the world. i didn't enjoy it. every thought and/or decision became more important than the last. believing that i create my reality/experience would have driven me crazy (no comments please). so, logically, i decided to have the ultimate confidence in myself that no matter what decision i made, it was the best one. this removed the need to worry over my next thought and led to a lighthearted view of playing at life. do not get me wrong, i am not a dillitant(sp?). i have values and beliefs, but they are like my clothes, when they no longer fit or get uncomfortable, i change.

We all make decisions or choices in our short Earth time perception. We are now given a set of precepts or guidelines that like a roadmap allow us to turn to the right or left, up or down in our own conscious choices.

Unfortunately, the choices we make are usually those paths of least resistance which may not be the choice we should choose. I do not feel that the universe revolves around me but innately understand that there is irreducible complexity in our bodies and the universe around us. I cannot make the molecules in my DNA line up and bind correctly or use enzymes to direct the splicing of segments of the gene to create new life. I cannot find that particles of irreducible complexity across the universe can communicate ex nihilo.

the experience that i have gives me the information on how these views are working for me. hey, I'm only here for short time, may as well have fun!

You are speaking of Hedonism. I'm not so sure we are ultimately in this dimension for pure self-pleasure.

isn't it egocentric to believe that our life has a greater purpose/meaning?? why can't we just be here to expand our individual conciousness in our own simple, individual way??

You might say that it is egocentric to think that we are here for fun and pleasure. And that as long as we are here, why not just take whatever you want from your neighbor, kill him at your own whim, rape his wife because they are there or in the opposite, lead this short life for the betterment of all.

let's go!

 

[olde drunk]

silly

to suggest that hedonism or playing at life gives license to raping and killing is ludicrous.

back to our original topic. imho, there is no master creator or greater wisdom for us to reach.

whenever i suspect that there is a 'greater purpose' to our lives i remind myself of my logical conclusions on the subject. i think about an individual born into the outback of china, africa or whatever. he grows up as a peasant, working the fields with his family. ironically, he is a happy person because he grows good crops, his family is sheltered, fed and cared for. he takes supreme joy in talking to his animals and crops, he thanks them for sharing their existence with him and his. he respects their roles and provides for them almost religiously.

now, this poor, ignorant man, never hears of buddha, plato, christ, mohamed or any of the great minds of the world. he simply accepts his role in the universe, accepts his reality and is happy. NOW, why would a god create such a situation if we have a 'greater purpose'? why should we think that (in the grand scheme of things) that being super educated and/or a world leader is more important than being that peasant? these other roles improve society, but what do they do within the broader reality? does anyone truly believe that einstein deserves a better place in the universe than themselves? god forbid i should suggest that even jesus is not more deserving than that peasant (if there were afterlife rewards).

that's my logical progression to satify all my questions about what really is happening. i create my reality and experience. i am here to experience a physical existence and expand my awareness and/or conciousness.

actually, i envy that peasant. i wonder, is it his first or last life on earth??

 

[onycho]

Originally posted by olde drunk

to suggest that hedonism or playing at life gives license to raping and killing is ludicrous.

Hedonism, olde drunk, is living solely for self gratification with no precepts to live by. You said:
hey, I'm only here for short time, may as well have fun!

back to our original topic. imho, there is no master creator or greater wisdom for us to reach.

It is reassuring to know that you are certain that there is no master Creator. Why I could have gone on for the remainder of my life just in amazement at the miraculous impossibly constructed world we live in and now with your certain assurance that all this irreducible complexity simply arose out of evolutionary chaos.

whenever i suspect that there is a 'greater purpose' to our lives i remind myself of my logical conclusions on the subject. i think about an individual born into the outback of china, africa or whatever. he grows up as a peasant, working the fields with his family. ironically, he is a happy person because he grows good crops, his family is sheltered, fed and cared for. he takes supreme joy in talking to his animals and crops, he thanks them for sharing their existence with him and his. he respects their roles and provides for them almost religiously.

It is nice to personally comprehend with all certainty that some are born into a world of plenty and pleasure while others are born into poverty and pain. As you say, a child born into slavery, pain or cancer must ironically also be a happy carefree human. Ultimately with this unambiguous understanding that no great imponderable purpose exists to our lives, time or place then we can just kick-back and enjoy a nice ride.

I wish I could be as certain...

Now, this poor, ignorant man, never hears of buddha, plato, christ, mohamed or any of the great minds of the world. he simply accepts his role in the universe, accepts his reality and is happy. NOW, why would a god create such a situation if we have a 'greater purpose'? why should we think that (in the grand scheme of things) that being super educated and/or a world leader is more important than being that peasant? these other roles improve society, but what do they do within the broader reality? does anyone truly believe that einstein deserves a better place in the universe than themselves? god forbid i should suggest that even jesus is not more deserving than that peasant (if there were afterlife rewards).

There just might be a purpose to our lives (no matter the circumstance) or the reason that eagles soar over mountains or a beetle is born or our sun which releases just enough energy to keep us warm instead of having a degree or two to much or to little which would burn us to a cinder or a world of ice. What does anyone deserve or not deserve in world of pleasure and pain? How much ultimate reward do you deserve or will you just go out like a flame?

There are only a few of us who truly know the answers to these enigmas.

that's my logical progression to satify all my questions about what really is happening. i create my reality and experience. i am here to experience a physical existence and expand my awareness and/or conciousness.

Yes the universe does truly revolve around you in your sole knowledge of your reality and experience.

actually, i envy that peasant. i wonder, is it his first or last life on earth??

I believe that it is his first and only trek through this massive hologram in which we each perceive our own consciousness as we assume it exists.

 

[Rader]

How it is:?

Originally posted by olde drunk
i believe that we are in constant communication with and within the universe! how else can we explain those particles at opposite ends of the universe 'immediately' changing spin or charge to accommodate a change in the other?

The fact of the matter is QM does not explain this phenomenon. There seems to be something more. There are four current interpretations of how QM works, all four have a part to play and each has something to say about the bizarre micro world. None is complete or total in its explanation. There are others. Mine is not of them but part of them.
01=The Copenhagan intrepretation
02=The Stochastic-Ensemble Interpretation
03=Everets Many worlds
04=Hidden Variable Intrepretation
If you want to read a great book to lead you up to your own choice of how it is.
Read>The physics of consciousness by Evan Harris Walker
ISBN O-7382-0436-6
In my humble opinion this book might lead you in the right direction.

 

[olde drunk]

reply 1

Onycho – let’s break this down into smaller pieces.
In my world hedonism is the simple pursuit of doing things that are pleasant. No where do most dictionaries or I say, without regard to precepts. If it’s enjoyable, do it! If it ain’t, STOP!

nothing mystical, just a simple view of living and coexisting with my fellowman. i do not like to hurt others, ergo i don't do it.

back to views on reality in the next post.

peace,

 

[olde drunk]

chaos

/I/onycho-It is reassuring to know that you are certain that there is no master Creator. Why I could have gone on for the remainder of my life just in amazement at the miraculous impossibly constructed world we live in and now with your certain assurance that all this irreducible complexity simply arose out of evolutionary chaos./I/

oldedrunk - I usually say 'imho' - meaning that after much exploration, I have found what works for me. There was a creation, who or what is the creator, is basically unimportant to me since all of traditional explanations fail any test of logic. imho- it is the/a gestalt of all consciousness. Almost like a message center trading, enhancing, and creating information for all of us to accept/reject and play with. It maybe a higher level of consciousness, but without rules or commandments. Society created most rules of behavior. They may have come from a higher source as an aide for civilization, but they are no required.

Yes, the world is miraculous! I also believe that it is a playground and not a temple or church.

Isn’t it amazing that this started as a question about reality being influenced by our assumptions. There is a perfect example. I also doubt that there was chaos at the beginning. Some would postulate that there is chaos now. Trying viewing your universe without time and space.

I also suspect that as you and I look at Michelangelo’s Pieta’, we may see two totally independent statues. That’s for scientists to pursue.

peace,

 

[onycho]

Originally posted by olde drunk
Onycho – let’s break this down into smaller pieces.
In my world hedonism is the simple pursuit of doing things that are pleasant. No where do most dictionaries or I say, without regard to precepts. If it’s enjoyable, do it! If it ain’t, STOP!

nothing mystical, just a simple view of living and coexisting with my fellowman. i do not like to hurt others, ergo i don't do it.

back to views on reality in the next post.

peace,

Your definition of hedonism is very interesting. You say, "if it's enjoyable, do it! If it ain't, STOP!"

So in effect it seems that you are saying that if you are living a life of self pleasure, then go for it but you also choose to make up your own rules about the appropriate ways to treat your fellowman.

What did the hedonist do before there were rules or precepts to coexist with your fellowman and not to hurt others? What would you have done without these rules we now live by under our system of law and justice? Would you come to them by your own intellect?

 

[onycho]

Originally posted by olde drunk

oldedrunk - I usually say 'imho' - meaning that after much exploration, I have found what works for me. There was a creation, who or what is the creator, is basically unimportant to me since all of traditional explanations fail any test of logic.

Do you mean that by your own human logic and olde drunk human explanation there can be no room for consideration of a Creator? If there is no logic or reasonable explanation to our senses that we live in a world of molecules, hydrogen, oxygen, carbon, nitrogen, etc which we cannot see or feel, they therefore do not exist. If I can't see the atmosphere or subatomic particles with my eyes, obviously there is no need for understanding that they fail my test of logic and explanation.

imho- it is the/a gestalt of all consciousness. Almost like a message center trading, enhancing, and creating information for all of us to accept/reject and play with. It maybe a higher level of consciousness, but without rules or commandments. Society created most rules of behavior. They may have come from a higher source as an aide for civilization, but they are no required.

So, if there might be a higher source to give guidelines for civilization, they are not really required.. If we look back into history before these guideline/rules, mankind lived for the most part by instinct resulting in beastiality and total loss of experiencing others pains or damage that actions directed against them based on our own pleasure. You now have the privilege to live a life of pleasure but taking into account your own feelings for your fellowman. Very nice indeed.

"Yes, the world is miraculous! I also believe that it is a playground and not a temple or church."

I never said that the world needed a temple or church for the miraculous nature of the universe or our world to function.

Isn’t it amazing that this started as a question about reality being influenced by our assumptions. There is a perfect example. I also doubt that there was chaos at the beginning. Some would postulate that there is chaos now. Trying viewing your universe without time and space.

Reality before the Big Bang is unknown. You doubt that chaos existed in the events following the Big Bank, so things were either always formed perfectly or there was a pin point start of all energy to particles in a perfectly smooth non-chaotic event. Where you aware of the fact that just a little bit more or less of that energy and heat would have resulted in a universe of nothing in a flux?

For our finite minds, visualizing a universe without time or space is not only difficult but downright impossible. That does not mean this event is not possible because it doesn't fit into our human logic or explanation to our own satisfaction. I can visualize that we now exist in a dimension without time or space but that is just me.

I also suspect that as you and I look at Michelangelo’s Pieta’, we may see two totally independent statues. That’s for scientists to pursue.

Do we really see Michelangelos's Pieta or do we assume we see it? What if it does not exist in reality as Michaelangelo was nothing more than a part of the same hologram that we visualize in a void?

This is not for scientists but really for metaphyics and theology.

May the Force be with you...

 

[olde drunk]

is it or isn't it real?

i'm getting confused. you refer to the beauty of our world, and all its physical components. then you refer to it being an illusion.

may i rephrase?

our world is an illusion that we experience as real and have chosen to deal with it as real.

from that persecptive, the world is always as perfect as it should be, at any given moment in time. this is so because we can enter an illusion at anytime to experience anything we choose. the world is perfect because it is providing what we want.

i can not and do not dispute that. i simply do not need an explanation for the universe that spawned our universe. as you can see from my previous paragraph, i explain my basis for reincarnation. our greater self(soul?) is out there deciding which lifetime thread(s) to experience within the illusion or whatever.

if we choose our experience, doesn't it follow that we also we see the world according to our assumptions(beliefs)?

if the world is an illusion why be concerned about the inequity between the rich/poor, healthy/lame?? it is only an illusion.

next phase, did they each choose their individual experience? isn't this more acceptable than having a greater power inflict experience on a being within this framework??

we are all equal. there is no greater or lesser experience. we are here to expand our consciousness however we choose. moreover, once we accept responsibility for our reality, we also realize that we have the ability to change an undesirable experience into a productive positive accomplishment.

we might even enjoy the process and have fun.

peace,

 

[onycho]

REAL ILLUSION FOR FREEWILL

Originally posted by olde drunk

i'm getting confused. you refer to the beauty of our world, and all its physical components. then you refer to it being an illusion.
may i rephrase?
our world is an illusion that we experience as real and have chosen to deal with it as real.

May I rephrase your last statement? Our collective consciousness experiences 'things' but we do not choose to deal with it as real as the giant holograph is designed to be accepted as reality by the observers.

from that persecptive, the world is always as perfect as it should be, at any given moment in time. this is so because we can enter an illusion at anytime to experience anything we choose. the world is perfect because it is providing what we want.

Again I do not believe that we can choose to experience anything. If you tell your friend that he and you are not really solid living beings in a physical world, he will think you are crazy. We see only the beauty in the Designers hologram which is divisible by each individual's perspective but I do not believe that our world is any way perfect as for many it provides only pain, suffering, hunger and death.

Can you choose to become a despotic ruler or a Budda simply because you feel like changing your perspective?

i can not and do not dispute that. i simply do not need an explanation for the universe that spawned our universe. as you can see from my previous paragraph, i explain my basis for reincarnation. our greater self(soul?) is out there deciding which lifetime thread(s) to experience within the illusion or whatever.

Your above statement is a perfect example of your free will's choice. You say that you do not need an explanation for the basis of existence experience or the Creator whose Wisdom is unknowable. How do you come to the conclusion that you can decide which life tract or thread to experience for yourself? I admit that my conclusions are based on my own opinions and have no signed document validating my constructs. I also do not accept the concept of reincarnation as most (even Buddhists) humans think of his own reality.

if we choose our experience, doesn't it follow that we also we see the world according to our assumptions(beliefs)?

Ibid

if the world is an illusion why be concerned about the inequity between the rich/poor, healthy/lame?? it is only an illusion.

You ask why we need be concerned about the poor, the ill, the sick, the hunger or the death of our fellow travelers in this illusion? I believe our individual concern for others is our sole reason for existence, as our essence's existence in this giant dimensional holograph. We are being given the chance to mold and strengthen our 'free will' toward a difficult path in our presumed reality to assist in the continuous creation of 'good' rather than 'evil' in this holographic image. Our concern for our fellow suffering travelers is the goal and not self-gratification and enjoyment while others are in pain.

next phase, did they each choose their individual experience?

I believe that no one chooses their own experiences as outlined above.

isn't this more acceptable than having a greater power inflict experience on a being within this framework??

Not at all. The chance to follow the path of righteousness and goodness is likened to the hardening of metal in a cauldron. Our essence becomes greater and more like the Creator wants his creations (us) to become.

we are all equal.

We are not talking about the American Constitution where all men are said to be created equal. A child born with terminal cancer or a dying AIDS inflicted woman in Somalia is not given an equal status as you or me.

there is no greater or lesser experience. we are here to expand our consciousness however we choose. moreover, once we accept responsibility for our reality, we also realize that we have the ability to change an undesirable experience into a productive positive accomplishment.

Really? Do you believe that each of us realizes that we have the ability to change undersirable experiences or other lives in a more productive or positive accomplishment? If that were the case, the whole of humanity would be altruistic instead of indulging in self pleasure and gratification while those around us cry out in need and pain.

we might even enjoy the process and have fun.

That is up to you and your free will choice in this realm of illusion and pain.

peace, [/B][/QUOTE]