BrainMeta'   Connectomics'  

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Does It Still Exist?
Ben
post Feb 04, 2004, 09:21 PM
Post #1


Aspiring
**

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 71
Joined: Oct 28, 2003
From: Reading, PA
Member No.: 700



Ok here's something that I've been pondering for a little while.

We're made up of atoms and appear solid because of the fast moving electrons in these atoms. Which means if the atoms were to stop moving we'd be mostly empty space. I assume this means that time travel is impossible since time is constantly moving forward and to move back it would eventually have to stop at some point along the way, and we or maybe just those who were attempting to travel through time would "vanish". I'm not sure if that's right or how that would work, but it made sense to me. What I was wondering about, is if we were able to freeze an object or person down to absolute zero, to the point where the electrons would stop moving and it "vanished", would it still exist in the sense that we exist?
If it was a person, would they still be a considered a "person" being made up of mostly empty space. And what would the empty space created be filled by? And what would take the place of whatever filled the empty space. Anybody want to clear that up for me? Thanks!
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dan
post Feb 04, 2004, 10:40 PM
Post #2


God
******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 1922
Joined: May 01, 2003
From: Sri Danananda
Member No.: 96



It sounds to me like you might enjoy studying physics and philosophy at the college level. A proper answer to your questions just might take that kind of dedicated effort

brain.gif
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Laz
post Feb 05, 2004, 01:41 AM
Post #3


Demi-God
*****

Group: Full Member
Posts: 676
Joined: Jun 17, 2003
Member No.: 255



Hey Ben, hows it going?

Wow, thats a lot of questions you have asked and assumtions you have made in not a lot of space! I'm trying to pick out the main interest you have from your post...

To go with the time travel route; What makes you think time exists? Did humans discover time or did we invent it?

Have a read of this article posted a few days ago, it may answer some of your questions and change the way you look at things: Perspective

Just because time happens to fit in nicely with mathematical equations doesn't mean it actually exists!

Cheers smile.gif
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dan
post Feb 05, 2004, 08:58 AM
Post #4


God
******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 1922
Joined: May 01, 2003
From: Sri Danananda
Member No.: 96



this is kind of funny, because I was having this conversation about time on another board. My opinion is time happens. Time is real insofar as the universe evolves; time simply refers to the serial quality of the evolution/movement of the universe. I don't get too worked up about 'time continuum/relativity/brane' interpretations of time, as any theoretical interpretation that makes time into more than the simple above-mentioned idea is just playing mathematical games
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
sol
post Feb 05, 2004, 09:58 AM
Post #5


Aspiring
**

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 68
Joined: Sep 09, 2003
Member No.: 528



QUOTE (Dan @ Feb 05, 09:58 AM)
I don't get too worked up about 'time continuum/relativity/brane' interpretations of time, as any theoretical interpretation that makes time into more than the simple above-mentioned idea is just playing mathematical games

Time Travel

Well Dan,

You understand that this abstraction builds up from a whole bunch of science, right?

The link supplied also injects fresh perspective that unites consciousness, as well cosmology in this framework. An attempt anyway:)

Now when we speak about the science being used, we use a paradigmal change, by accepting a model of apprehension. We engage the current science, by how this theoretical framework can be used.

Sol
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dan
post Feb 05, 2004, 10:14 AM
Post #6


God
******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 1922
Joined: May 01, 2003
From: Sri Danananda
Member No.: 96



what I understand is that I observe the universe evolving in a sequential fashion. It is really quite simple, what is not simple is all the mathematically derived gibberish that passes for 'physical insight' these days
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
sol
post Feb 05, 2004, 10:18 AM
Post #7


Aspiring
**

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 68
Joined: Sep 09, 2003
Member No.: 528



QUOTE (Ben @ Feb 04, 10:21 PM)
Ok here's something that I've been pondering for a little while.

We're made up of atoms and appear solid because of the fast moving electrons in these atoms. Which means if the atoms were to stop moving we'd be mostly empty space. I assume this means that time travel is impossible since time is constantly moving forward and to move back it would eventually have to stop at some point along the way, and we or maybe just those who were attempting to travel through time would "vanish". I'm not sure if that's right or how that would work, but it made sense to me. What I was wondering about, is if we were able to freeze an object or person down to absolute zero, to the point where the electrons would stop moving and it "vanished", would it still exist in the sense that we exist?
If it was a person, would they still be a considered a "person" being made up of mostly empty space. And what would the empty space created be filled by? And what would take the place of whatever filled the empty space. Anybody want to clear that up for me? Thanks!

Ronald Mallet

Ben,

It is a daunting task to try and unite all this information we have out there in the world of science. In the mean time we are piece mealed with this information bombardment that awaits for the day these connecting neurons light up a wonderful show.

From that perspective, its a new world, and new perceptions. Ronald Mallet began from a position himself, and his experience became the motivator for these ideas.

It has lead him to a interesting presentation of a experimental framework for testing. The link should help explain, and give more perspective to those are are more heavily engaged in the sciences.

For them warpage in the fabric raises other possibilties that are compared to brane theoretical definitions. But is it all based on science currently being established.

Although it is recognized that it is out there in terms of the extremes of our knowledge base, my current conversation with Paul, on Tipping light cones is very relevant to the dimensional significance of what I feel also happens in consicousness, as well as the warpage in that fabric.

Space travel in a new way woud help significantly considering those distances. Carl Sagan, and Kip Thorne raise the stakes here in the discussins on Time Travel.

Enjoy,

Sol
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
sol
post Feb 05, 2004, 10:25 AM
Post #8


Aspiring
**

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 68
Joined: Sep 09, 2003
Member No.: 528



QUOTE (Dan @ Feb 05, 11:14 AM)
what I understand is that I observe the universe evolving in a sequential fashion. It is really quite simple, what is not simple is all the mathematically derived gibberish that passes for 'physical insight' these days

I agree Dan on the sequential fashion, given the undertanding of the geometry that is spoken too. Its fabrication as well, giving definition to a subject we are trying to define in nature.

In order for you to classify gibberish, as wonderful jaunts in the abstract realms, it has to be understood how well we can play inthe fields of imagination, but even more critical, is staying intune with the science process as you suggest.

Putting limitations on the furthest extensions of our knowledge will be hampered by statements, of that gibberish. All we have to do is look at Escher and Dali to understand that there was a greater work at play, then just art.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dan
post Feb 05, 2004, 12:59 PM
Post #9


God
******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 1922
Joined: May 01, 2003
From: Sri Danananda
Member No.: 96



QUOTE
I agree Dan on the sequential fashion, given the undertanding of the geometry that is spoken too.

the sequentiality I am speaking of implies an absolute now as an instantaneous cross-section of the universe that is evolving (no relativity of simultaneity). Geometrical structure is irrelevant as any structural configuration of the universe will still possess the property of simultaneity of existence of all parts and serial temporal evolution.

QUOTE
In order for you to classify gibberish, as wonderful jaunts in the abstract realms ...

I would not classify gibberish as wonderful jaunts in the abstract realms, I would classify it somewhere along the lines of confusion. Perhaps the confused individual feels quite wonderful in such disconnection from reality, perhaps not
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
post Feb 05, 2004, 06:38 PM
Post #10





Group:
Posts:
Joined: --
Member No.:



Ben,
Here are my crazy theories. First of all I believe that where there is "nothing" or just space, absolute consciousness exists without an observer to define it. Secondly, to travel means we would cover a certain distance over a certain amount of time. I believe we all are that space/absolute consciousness physically defined by matter and time. So when we are in motion we experience an objective reality meaning forward movement (finite velocity) with time as our frame of reference. Ok so we are vibrating right?? On and off our atoms move but so fast we aren't aware of when we are off. What happens when we go "off" for that split second?? First note that length and time depend on a frame of reference and like I said time is our frame of reference when we are "on". As we approach the "off" moment our vel. increases and increases while the length of time increases or appears to slow down to us. So if all of our atoms are totally "off" or frozen then our velocity will be infinte and our subjective reality and time will appear to us to be infinite. With that in mind there is no boundary definining where we exisit... forward, backward... past, future because time objectively will be frozen but subjectively will be infinte until we turn "on" again in our 3 dimensional reality. Please anyone tell me if any of this makes sense. I tend to ramble but don't have any actual true sources to back up my thoughts.
User is offlinePM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
sol
post Feb 05, 2004, 07:49 PM
Post #11


Aspiring
**

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 68
Joined: Sep 09, 2003
Member No.: 528




Omega. Yet there are things still happening for sure.smile.gif

From a dimensional perspective, we can travel a great distance in a short period of time?


Geometrical structure is irrelevant as any structural configuration of the universe will still possess the property of simultaneity of existence of all parts and serial temporal evolution.


Surely the lessons of Kleins Ordering of geometries has its relevances to the science we look at today? Could you tell me how to get to hyperspace please:)

I would not classify gibberish as wonderful jaunts in the abstract realms, I would classify it somewhere along the lines of confusion.

I think that's what you said about math? It is confusion, if the order of geometries is not understood.

Perhaps the confused individual feels quite wonderful in such disconnection from reality, perhaps not

Disassociation from reality, is a very troubling issue, for those confused for sure?smile.gif
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dan
post Feb 05, 2004, 10:20 PM
Post #12


God
******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 1922
Joined: May 01, 2003
From: Sri Danananda
Member No.: 96



QUOTE
Surely the lessons of Kleins Ordering of geometries has its relevances to the science we look at today? Could you tell me how to get to hyperspace please:)

any structure is still a structure. The point is, 'time' is not a physical structure so I don't need to know about any particular physical structural configuration to understand time. 'Now' is where physical structure exists, and physical structure clearly exhibits motion. Time is simply how we cognize these facts, where we understand 'past' in terms of 'what it all was' and 'future' in terms of 'what it will become'.


QUOTE
I think that's what you said about math? It is confusion, if the order of geometries is not understood.

I did not say that math is confusion, I implied that confusion can be generated by those who misinterpret the meaning of mathematical statements.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
sol
post Feb 06, 2004, 09:55 PM
Post #13


Aspiring
**

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 68
Joined: Sep 09, 2003
Member No.: 528



QUOTE (Dan @ Feb 05, 11:20 PM)
any structure is still a structure.  The point is, 'time' is not a physical structure so I don't need to know about any particular physical structural configuration to understand time.  'Now' is where physical structure exists, and physical structure clearly exhibits motion.  Time is simply how we cognize these facts, where we understand 'past' in terms of 'what it all was' and 'future' in terms of 'what it will become'. 




The Function of the Metric

I agree with the undertanding of time then in terms of dimension.

If such potentials could exist in any now, then indeed we have the past to include in any future?

IN the thread on tipping light cones, we needed a way in which to percieve, the holes in the fabric. Human experiencie in its depth of experience density of vibrations has a energy relationn here to me, has a way of integrating how these flunctuations could exist.

From a fifth dimension significance, we learn then to include not only light but gravity too:)

It becomes a completed circle. At that point, we learn about the depth dimension can hold, and its measure in distance? In that point, we could contain the universe?

Your thoughts,
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dan
post Feb 06, 2004, 10:20 PM
Post #14


God
******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 1922
Joined: May 01, 2003
From: Sri Danananda
Member No.: 96



Your thoughts, [/QUOTE]
QUOTE


I agree with the undertanding of time then in terms of dimension.

when one thinks of physical spatial dimensions, one imagines a simultaneously existing connected substrate. If one decides to think of time in a similar fashion, one creates the mistaken idea that the past and the future exist in some sort of simultaneous fashion (the so-called 'space-time'). Time is not like space, all of its 'elements' (except for NOW) do not reallyt exist but only pseudo-exist in the mind of the person imagining the past or future. There is no real 'space-time fabric', there is only the mathematically imaginative person who defines a 'space-time manifold' under the assumption of time as a 'spatial' dimension.

However, there may well be hidden dimensions to physical structure. These dimensions would also all be present 'now' and evolve. The caveat is that time is not a dimension like space, it is more like a 'phantom' dimension of thought that refers to the unbounded seriality of existence.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
sol
post Feb 06, 2004, 10:42 PM
Post #15


Aspiring
**

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 68
Joined: Sep 09, 2003
Member No.: 528



QUOTE (Dan @ Feb 06, 11:20 PM)

However, there may well be hidden dimensions to physical structure. These dimensions would also all be present 'now' and evolve. The caveat is that time is not a dimension like space, it is more like a 'phantom' dimension of thought that serves to abstract the basis of motion

Solidifing the Experience

It is not so much the abstraction that could possibly lead to illusions as the current perspective here has a defintion in the fifth dimenison. You have to know this?

Then what happens is you sense the holes lets say, and it depth. It's possibilties as probabilties depending on the energy content.

Use a blackhole here for consideration?

Does this make sense?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dan
post Feb 06, 2004, 10:49 PM
Post #16


God
******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 1922
Joined: May 01, 2003
From: Sri Danananda
Member No.: 96



QUOTE
It is not so much the abstraction that could possibly lead to illusions as the current perspective here has a defintion in the fifth dimenison. You have to know this?

Can you explain to me what you mean by 'fifth dimension'?


QUOTE
Then what happens is you sense the holes lets say, and it depth. It's possibilties as probabilties depending on the energy content.

Use a blackhole here for consideration?

Does this make sense?

no
and to be quite honest, most of what you say doesn't make much sense to me. It usually appears to me as somewhat of a theoretical-physics-jargon word-salad
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
sol
post Feb 07, 2004, 04:40 AM
Post #17


Aspiring
**

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 68
Joined: Sep 09, 2003
Member No.: 528



QUOTE (Dan @ Feb 06, 11:49 PM)
Can you explain to me what you mean by 'fifth dimension'?


QUOTE
Then what happens is you sense the holes lets say, and it depth. It's possibilties as probabilties depending on the energy content.

Use a blackhole here for consideration?

Does this make sense?


Dan said:It usually appears to me as somewhat of a theoretical-physics-jargon word-salad



Hyperspace, by Michio Kaku Page 84 and 85

"To see higher dimensions simplify the laws of nature, we recall that any object has length, width and depth. Since we have the freedom to rotate an object by 90 degrees, we can turn its length into width, and its width into depth. By a simple rotation, we can interchange any of the three spatial dimensions. Now if time is the fourth dimension then it is possible to make "rotations" that convert space into time, and vice versa. These four-dimensional "rotations" are precisely the distortions of space and time demanded by special relativity. In other words, space and time have mixed in a essential way, governed by relativity. The meaning of time as being the fourth dimension is that time and space can rotate into each other in a mathematical precise way. From now on, they must be treated as two aspects of the same quantity: space-time. Thus adding a higher dimension helped to unify the laws of nature


Hyperspace, by Michio Kaku Pg 9

Since the theory was considered to be a wild speculation, it was never taught in graduate school; so young physicists are left to discover it quite by accident in their casual readings. This alternative theory gave <b>the simplest explanation of light; that it was really a vibration of the fifth dimension</b>, or what used to be called the fourth dimension by the mystics. If light could travel through a vacuum, it was because the vacuum itself was vibrating, because the “vacuum” really existed in four dimensions of space and one of time. By adding the fifth dimension, the force of gravity and light could be unified in a startlingly simple way...

Hulse and Taylor, Blackhole Hole? It's a leading perspective about what can gather and how curvature is implied.

Less words I use then, the better:)

Remember the question of how one gets to Hyperspace? Can you show me?smile.gif
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dan
post Feb 07, 2004, 11:07 AM
Post #18


God
******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 1922
Joined: May 01, 2003
From: Sri Danananda
Member No.: 96



why should I believe that this guy is making sense? As far as I can tell, he suffers from the same 'time is a spatial dimension' delusion that most 'relativity' proponents suffer from. The fact that he co-founded 'string theory' suggests that his interest in promoting this theoretical field may be tainted by personal ambition. The fact is, there are no experimental results that uniquely validate string theory or its successors. It survives because mathematical physicists enjoy it, theoretical physicists enjoy the 'genius' mystique surrounding it and experimental physicists haven't proven that it is wrong (due mainly to inaccessibility of its unique features).


And you still have offered no explanation of what this 'fifth dimension' is short of punting to authoritative ramblings. I presume it is one of the dimensions proposed by Kaku, which rings warning bells in my mind as such dimensions have never been verified experimentally.

As for your question about hyperspace, can you explain that one a little better? If I understand, then I will tell you what I think about the possibility of 'getting' to it or not
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
sol
post Feb 07, 2004, 08:20 PM
Post #19


Aspiring
**

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 68
Joined: Sep 09, 2003
Member No.: 528



QUOTE (Dan @ Feb 07, 12:07 PM)
The fact is, there are no experimental results that uniquely validate string theory or its successors.  It survives because mathematical physicists enjoy it, theoretical physicists enjoy the 'genius' mystique surrounding it and experimental physicists haven't proven that it is wrong (due mainly to inaccessibility of its unique features).



As for your question about hyperspace, can you explain that one a little better?  If I understand, then I will tell you what I think about the possibility of 'getting' to it or not

When Is a Pipe a Pipe?

Dan,

I appreciate Kaku for taking me on a journey that I would have never understood had he not helped enlighten. There are a lot of people looking at this, and the paradigm change, is helping to reconciled what reductionism has come to recognize. Is the nature of reality either discrete or flowing?

In this two branches speak. One is Loop Quantum Gravity and the other Superstrings.

Now these two groups are bantering it back and forth, but there is a extremely complex information that one can enter here, had one so choosen.


If life is easier not engaging, for sure sit back and relax in a state of mind that you feel most conducive too and to what perceptions you need from life, to assess the reality you face.

The key idea of Theodore Kaluza in the 1920s was to write down a five dimensional theory of gravity. In five dimensions, the gravitational field has 15 independent numbers, which can be arranged in a five dimensional array (see fig.4). Kaluza then re-defined the 5th column and row of the gravitation al field to be the electromagnetic field of Maxwell. The truly miraculous feature of this construction is that the five dimensional theory of gravity reduces down precisely to Einstein's original theory of gravity plus Maxwell's theory of light. In other words, by adding the fifth dimension, we have trivially unified light with gravity. In other words, light is now viewed as vibrations in the fifth dimension. In five dimensions, there is “enough room” to unify both gravity and light.


The Fish Pond
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dan
post Feb 08, 2004, 11:45 AM
Post #20


God
******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 1922
Joined: May 01, 2003
From: Sri Danananda
Member No.: 96



QUOTE

If life is easier not engaging, for sure sit back and relax in a state of mind that you feel most conducive too and to what  perceptions you need from life, to assess the reality you face.

I'm not sure what you mean by this, hopefully you are not implying that I am not 'engaging' as this would be flat out wrong. I must admit, I am a 'discretist' when it comes to describing structure; I understand structure to be most completely described in terms of discrete, structureless 'nodes' which interact in specific ways such that the physical universe can be completely described in terms of a 'network' structure. I see continuity as existing in perception alone, and not 'out there' in physical structure. People who try to describe physical structure in terms of continuity will forever be chasing rainbows
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
sol
post Feb 08, 2004, 09:47 PM
Post #21


Aspiring
**

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 68
Joined: Sep 09, 2003
Member No.: 528



Dan,



I'm not sure what you mean by this, hopefully you are not implying that I am not 'engaging' as this would be flat out wrong.

Yes that was a mistaken assumption trying to comprehend the hesitancy to mathematical structure as another form of illusion, and the distancing from reality. I know you corrected here in terms. My apologies.

I must admit, I am a 'discretist' when it comes to describing structure; I understand structure to be most completely described in terms of discrete, structureless 'nodes' which interact in specific ways such that the physical universe can be completely described in terms of a 'network' structure.

You'll have to explain yourself here a little better so I can see a example of what you are saying. I have a example myself here that I wil try and find as well, that might correspond. I'll know more when you respond.


I see continuity as existing in perception alone, and not 'out there' in physical structure. People who try to describe physical structure in terms of continuity will forever be chasing rainbows

You might have ahard time understanding why weather men like the topic of topology, and the ways in which to describe the fluid motions. For instance the Friedmann equation in terms of the shape of the uiverse in term sof critical density and Omega. I think this to be similar to the ideas of discretism, as they become define in matter distinctions.

Emergent Realities

What is Nothing? Can You explain Nothing?smile.gif
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dan
post Feb 08, 2004, 11:33 PM
Post #22


God
******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 1922
Joined: May 01, 2003
From: Sri Danananda
Member No.: 96



QUOTE
You'll have to explain yourself here a little better so I can see a example of what you are saying. I have a example myself here that I wil try and find as well, that might correspond. I'll know more when you respond.

a node is 'structureless' in the geometric sense: it has no spatial 'size' nor does it exist inside of some geometric 'space'. It does posess internal 'structure' which is the basis for how it will relate to other nodes, and the pattern of interactivity of such a set of interacting nodes is the basis for physical structure. It is in our perception alone that physical spatiality appears to exist, and attempts to locate a true spatially continuous physical object (such as a 'brane' or 'string') are equivalent to 'rainbow-chasing'. That's not to say that continuum-based mathematical logic cannot be morphic to physical structural logic, it is just to say that it can never be isomorphic.


QUOTE
You might have ahard time understanding why weather men like the topic of topology, and the ways in which to describe the fluid motions. For instance the Friedmann equation in terms of the shape of the uiverse in term sof critical density and Omega. I think this to be similar to the ideas of discretism, as they become define in matter distinctions.

people like to understand what is perceived in terms that are similar to the perception. If I perceive a continuous fluid, then I prefer a mathematics of continuous fluids for simplicity. Of course, dynamics of gas is derived from a discrete interacting medium and it is in the statistical asymptote of large scales (large volumes containing jillions of particles) that the 'continuum fluid' properties can be recovered.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
sol
post Feb 09, 2004, 07:35 AM
Post #23


Aspiring
**

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 68
Joined: Sep 09, 2003
Member No.: 528



QUOTE (Dan @ Feb 09, 12:33 AM)
a node is 'structureless' in the geometric sense: it has no spatial 'size' nor does it exist inside of some geometric 'space'.  It does posess internal 'structure' which is the basis for how it will relate to other nodes, and the pattern of interactivity of such a set of interacting nodes is the basis for physical structure.   It is in our perception alone that physical spatiality appears to exist, and attempts to locate a true spatially continuous physical object (such as a 'brane' or 'string') are equivalent to 'rainbow-chasing'.  That's not to say that continuum-based mathematical logic cannot be morphic to physical structural logic, it is just to say that it can never be isomorphic.



That's not to say that continuum-based mathematical logic cannot be morphic to physical structural logic, it is just to say that it can never be isomorphic.

If you take resonance and consider it's value on a drum the geometrical consideration of sound is of value?


What would this correlate be then in consideration of the minds experience, in the neural correlate patterns? Can the brain structure reaveal such patterns geometrically?

The comparison to the isometrical relation is the quest of uniting the Quantum world to the the descriptions of GR.



Mandalas in the Cosmos

If you understand orbitals, then think of probabilty interpretations, as a way around Hiesenberg's uncertainty priniple.

Emergent patterns from chaos, must hold pattern possibilties, and a direct link to such resonant patterns? This is speculation.

Slice a brain, after a introduction to sound and what pattern is induced?

I will show you a neurolate correspondance in the cosmos:) soon. This is what I was thinking when I asked for further details to what I have in quote from you.

Does the jest of this post answer your quote to some degree?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Laz
post Feb 10, 2004, 03:09 AM
Post #24


Demi-God
*****

Group: Full Member
Posts: 676
Joined: Jun 17, 2003
Member No.: 255



For me, Hawking, Penrose, et al. have gone a long way in describing the nature of universe, and I think that they deserve their status in the scientific community.

However, I have never been part of that community and do not wish to be either. One can learn a lot from others, but ultimately one has to ask themselves those questions and provide answers of your own, if you concur then great, but if you don't maybe something is wrong at an higher level.

I am looking at the universe from my own perspective. When I read about the theories of some award winning scientist, my thoughts are not; ok lets take what they have said as gospel and build on it. Instead my feelings are to question how they arrived at their understanding, to do otherwise is for me, living a life on the n-th floor of a house of cards.

Time does not feature in my world at a fundamental level, it is a useful attribute but that is it. I believe that a lot of the scientific theories regarding the nature of the universe do not need time as a factor, thus they are useful for me to learn about and understand so I can refactor them.

God does not have a VCR wink.gif
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
sol
post Feb 10, 2004, 04:31 PM
Post #25


Aspiring
**

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 68
Joined: Sep 09, 2003
Member No.: 528



user posted image

The neural correlate in the cosmos I mentioned to Dan.


Omega


Sol
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
sol
post Feb 10, 2004, 04:43 PM
Post #26


Aspiring
**

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 68
Joined: Sep 09, 2003
Member No.: 528



QUOTE (Laz @ Feb 10, 04:09 AM)


However, I have never been part of that community and do not wish to be either. One can learn a lot from others, but ultimately one has to ask themselves those questions and provide answers of your own, if you concur then great, but if you don't maybe something is wrong at an higher level.

Who saids laymen cannot speak to the interesting situations in life?

Time does not feature in my world at a fundamental level, it is a useful attribute but that is it. I believe that a lot of the scientific theories regarding the nature of the universe do not need time as a factor, thus they are useful for me to learn about and understand so I can refactor them.


I find it extremely interesting that the finer thoughts about life require a deeper attention to the subtle nature we see around us. We may be restricted from seeing this by all the noise we like to generate. Yet there is a music going on that resonates for some people. Finally it settles the mind to the perceptions they have been asking for. Incubated ideas that were the bait, for some soul food:)

God may not have a VCR, but it seems to me, we can certainly witness some great movie dynamics in the reality we live.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
post Feb 10, 2004, 05:26 PM
Post #27





Group:
Posts:
Joined: --
Member No.:



<quote>God may not have a VCR, but it seems to me, we can certainly witness some great movie dynamics in the reality we live.</quote>

Like what?


<quote>
Slice a brain, after a introduction to sound and what pattern is induced?

I will show you a neurolate correspondance in the cosmos:) soon.

</quote>


I don't get what you're talking about, Sol, or why you posted a black pic.
User is offlinePM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
sol
post Feb 10, 2004, 10:35 PM
Post #28


Aspiring
**

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 68
Joined: Sep 09, 2003
Member No.: 528



QUOTE (HayZeus @ Feb 10, 06:26 PM)
<quote>God may not have a VCR, but it seems to me, we can certainly witness  some great movie dynamics in the reality we live.</quote>

Like what?


<quote>
Slice a brain, after a introduction to sound and what pattern is induced?

I will show you a neurolate correspondance in the cosmos:) soon.

</quote>


I don't get what you're talking about, Sol, or why you posted a black pic.


Like what?



Like Life in General

I don't get what you're talking about, Sol, or why you posted a black pic.

You have to follow Dan and myself in conversation and you must let the picture load.( its about 1.7meg)

Imagine for a minute that Universe in its original state was much like the beginning of that picture, and as the universe cools, matter distinctions become apparent.

Well human experienece is like a holographical picture, that if you reduce it to a matter state, is much like those neurons that like to connect.

So I draw a parallel between what the universe is doing, and what is happening in our own brains. Neuro correlates as strings in the universe.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
2 User(s) are reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 24th September 2017 - 10:14 PM


Home     |     About     |    Research     |    Forum     |    Feedback  


Copyright BrainMeta. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use  |  Last Modified Tue Jan 17 2006 12:39 am

Consciousness Expansion · Brain Mapping · Neural Circuits · Connectomics  ·  Neuroscience Forum  ·  Brain Maps Blog
 · Connectomics · Connectomics  ·  shawn mikula  ·  shawn mikula  ·  articles