BrainMeta'   Connectomics'  

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> We can never deal with the original of matter
daramantus
post May 09, 2015, 11:12 AM
Post #1


Newbie
*

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 8
Joined: Apr 11, 2015
Member No.: 37641



"that we can never deal with the original of matter is a truth revealed by science"
"Actually matter does exist outside, but we are not in touch with the illusion of matter outside but its illusion in our brain. This is a fact revealed both by science and the Islamic scholars. "


I was reading and watching islam videos, and they all say that science proves their claims, that we can never deal with the original of matter, but a copy of it in our brains. to fit their beliefs that the original of matter, only God can see and touch.. lol?
They say we can never touch, smell, or see the "original of matter"

And about our eyes? LOL, they say the eyes are useless, and we see with our brains! and the sense of touch? lol

I want help, I want to know if that's true?

source: goo.gl/57HuWQ
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Joesus
post May 10, 2015, 06:03 AM
Post #2


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 4044
Joined: Sep 26, 2003
From: nowhere and everywhere
Member No.: 601



QUOTE(daramantus @ May 09, 2015, 07:12 PM) *

"that we can never deal with the original of matter is a truth revealed by science"
"Actually matter does exist outside, but we are not in touch with the illusion of matter outside but its illusion in our brain. This is a fact revealed both by science and the Islamic scholars. "


I was reading and watching islam videos, and they all say that science proves their claims, that we can never deal with the original of matter, but a copy of it in our brains. to fit their beliefs that the original of matter, only God can see and touch.. lol?
They say we can never touch, smell, or see the "original of matter"

And about our eyes? LOL, they say the eyes are useless, and we see with our brains! and the sense of touch? lol

I want help, I want to know if that's true?

source: goo.gl/57HuWQ

Is that origins of matter? Language and its meaning is often abused and misunderstood, especially by religionists who think they can understand the nature of scripture.

I'm not a Muslim or Islamic, but people have a way of misinterpreting words of prophets to the benefit of their own special belief systems. Buddhists and Christians have twisted scripture in the same way as Islam has twisted the words of Muhammad when it comes to knowing the absolute, or the nature of the unmanifest as it applies to "potential" underlying the manifestations of relative worlds of matter.

QUOTE
"that we can never deal with the original of matter is a truth revealed by science"

Science cannot yet fully grasp or understand the origins of matter because it is still being explored. Since the infinite potential of matter is an ongoing study and a process that is continually evolving the reference to God is used to expand the mind towards exploration rather than definition or to actually try to put it in a box, as the ego will try to do.
QUOTE
"Actually matter does exist outside, but we are not in touch with the illusion of matter outside but its illusion in our brain.
An atom is 99.999% empty space (meaning that all things constructed of atoms or atomic matter, is mostly empty space and not solid in the way we think matter should be). Science is still studying dark matter and has found that the empty space is not exactly empty. In fact it is full and exists as a "something" that has qualities, but these qualities change and alter themselves as they are being tested and observed. The Heisenberg uncertainty principle says we alter time and space according to the way consciousness interacts with it.
QUOTE
This is a fact revealed both by science and the Islamic scholars.

Islamic scholars and science approach the same thing and see different things because they look for different things. If an infinite pool has the potential of everything in it, but the mind seeks to find what it imagines, then if it is there, what the mind imagines it will pull out from that infinite potential. Spiritual sciences have always combined the imagined with the potential to substantiate the relative outcomes of focus, desire and manifestation of thought as the reflection of the mind or consciousness, which is the mirror of the absolute. Meaning the mind is the link between the infinite potential and the relative manifestation of consciousness. Different times, beliefs and evolving states of consciousness manifest relatively different ideas about reality.

QUOTE
And about our eyes? LOL, they say the eyes are useless, and we see with our brains! and the sense of touch? lol

Relatively speaking our eyes only allow certain spectrum's of light to be translated into meaning. Our eyes do not see the entire range of light waves. Sound is also a wave of light as is solid matter. When the senses are trained to receive patterns based on recognizable beliefs and within boundaries of relative beliefs, then they do not accept or register reality as it really is. For example, people do not see infrared, some are color blind, some are blind and only see with the senses not associated with the light taken in with the eyes.

The senses can be trained either to focus outward on what we see feel and touch with the outer senses, and disregard the subtle senses of intuition, and miss an entire world of reality. All prophets of note, spoke of the world available thru the subtle senses, which the mind is a lens. However the ego is more than often trained to use only the outer senses of feeling thru the skin, light thru the eyes, taste thru the tongue, and hearing thru the ears as the physical senses.

All spiritual scripture is associated to enlightened senses. When a person who uses their unenlightened senses to interpret reality its like claiming to know what sex is like without ever having sex. Then if someone happens to have sex once, the person claims to be an expert without exploring sex and getting to have any kind of familiarity with the differing moods and outcomes of the approach and exploration of sex and its possibilities, or probabilities based on the nature of reality.

This is how most scholars approach God or spirituality. They rely on their outer senses to describe and structure what can be seen, then make rules about the unseen which they only imagine but have no familiarity with. This leads to religion and the distortion of God and truth.

Like the Pharisees and Sadducee's of the bible, people who claim authority over God and then try to tell the people that God is unattainable and unobservable, also try to convince the people that somehow what can't be known by the ordinary man can only be known by those who call themselves holy. These people then use others to their advantage, to try and manipulate the world only to achieve power and wealth.

Original scripture always tells man that their senses can be trained to see and feel God (the unmanifest absolute) as the underlying nature of diversity and personality. In other words God is not a singular being but more "like" a singularity that is reflected thru the diversity of all times and all possible outcomes of matter, whether it be sentient or insentient.

Scripture more often describes God as the activity or manifestation of the absolute or the unmanifest consciousness. Or "God" as reflection of what can never be captured and contained by belief or the senses.
So religion focuses on God as the manifestation of the intellects best guess about reality according to the times and the weather of science and belief. Religionist's stay within the boundaries of belief. Spiritual scientists will always seek to go beyond those boundaries by seeking the unmanifest rather than to study the manifest only and isolate themselves within a particular idea of reality.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
daramantus
post May 10, 2015, 02:46 PM
Post #3


Newbie
*

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 8
Joined: Apr 11, 2015
Member No.: 37641



QUOTE
"The Heisenberg uncertainty principle says we alter time and space according to the way consciousness interacts with it."


Source?

From my understanding of quantum physics, as many physicists has taught me, no consciousness is involved in quantum mechanics.
[Sorry my bad english, I'm from Spain]
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Joesus
post May 11, 2015, 06:16 AM
Post #4


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 4044
Joined: Sep 26, 2003
From: nowhere and everywhere
Member No.: 601



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_principle

Sorry I should have said the Observer affect linked historically to the Heisenberg Uncertainty principle.
https://van.physics.illinois.edu/qa/listing.php?id=1228


"The Most Beautiful Experiment"


Quantum physics informs us that a system exists in superposition — that is, in all possible states — until we observe that it is only in one specific state.


According to a 2002 poll of Physics World readers, the “most beautiful experiment” in physics is one that simply and elegantly demonstrates how observation affects quantum systems: The double slit experiment. The double slit sets aside causality, determinism, and the notion that reality is “out there” as it blurs the line between the observer and the system being observed.

In the double slit experiment, a series of single photons (light particles) are fired at a solid plate that has two slits. On the other side of the solid plate, a photographic plate is set up to record what comes through those slits.


The question: What will we see on the photographic plate?

The answer: If one neglects to observe which slit a photon passes through, it appears to interfere with itself, suggesting that it behaves as a wave by traveling through both slits at once. But, if one chooses to observe the slits, the interference pattern disappears, and each photon travels through only one of the slits.

The formation of the interference pattern requires the existence of two slits… But how can a single photon pass through two slits simultaneously? At that point, we are forced to consider each photon as a wave that travels through both slits… Or we have to think of the photon as splitting and going through each slit separately — and wondering how the photon “knows” a pair of slits is coming.

The only solution is to abandon the idea of a photon — or any other quantum system — as having a location in spacetime until it is observed.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
daramantus
post May 11, 2015, 08:18 AM
Post #5


Newbie
*

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 8
Joined: Apr 11, 2015
Member No.: 37641



You forgot to mention, what an "Observer" is.. [which is not human]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observer_%28quantum_physics%29
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cahRCcMxuqY
https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/quant...erstand.579278/

"observation" is the same as "measurement" in quantum mechanics. In the double-slit experiment this corresponds to placing a particle detector at the slits, and we need not to consciously observe it.
We do "observations" with a machine, not with "Consciousness" or "Human Eye"
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Joesus
post May 11, 2015, 02:03 PM
Post #6


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 4044
Joined: Sep 26, 2003
From: nowhere and everywhere
Member No.: 601



If this part is true:
"Quantum physics informs us that a system exists in superposition — that is, in all possible states — until we observe that it is only in one specific state."

Then the "Observer" whether defined as conscious or not, is either in principle designed by someone who has a consciousness, and in the design of the observer is built the intent to measure something specific. Being that the object(s) being observed prior to design and intent are potentially ready to appear within the parameters of that which interests the designer and his/her observer, consciousness is a factor both in the perception of that which might be observable and the outcome of the observers measurement.

Tho consciousness cannot be defined by science it cannot be tossed aside as a non participant, tho ideally science would appear to validate reality by removing what it cannot define or quantify.

I'll still stand behind what I have said, without the need to speak for science.
Whether science or quantum physics wants to admit that what they postulate is inclusive of the consciousness that exists in both the creation of science and physics, as well as the creation of philosophy and even religion, all beliefs and or theories are relative to the existing human states of consciousness.

Its a simple process to identify that what we build, within any observer (instrument of measure) is relative to the specific desires of conscious awareness. Tho awareness is not always specific to the reality of what is being measured (not always in sync with reality as it really is) the outcomes are sometimes out of the boundaries of specific thought, being that what is measured is something other than what is expected. This can be linked to the fact that all that can be known is NOT known, by those creating the observer.

When you decide to isolate specifics in principle as science, then it leaves out philosophy and the ability to correlate connecting links within processes to build a relationship with those different processes. It's like trying to pretend your arms and legs don't work together because they are different and have different functions by design and having nothing to do with each other or the body they are attached to.

Simply put, we find what we look for, more often than discovering what we weren't expecting. But.. in order to identify what we didn't expect, it still has to be within the constructs of conscious awareness.

So getting back to my original point regarding the original post mentioning truth within scripture. Nothing comes from nothing and leads to nothing. Something comes from something and leads to whatever one can either imagine or understand according to how close they are to the ability to understand and experience.

Science says we evolve, and in that simple idea it means we have to rise above certain levels of thought and awareness in order to exceed a prior state of being, as well as how we relate to reality. Being that we no longer believe the world is flat, means we have caught up to certain truths that exist but were not seen or experienced because of belief. This simple fact also means that any instrument would be relative to that state of mind, and as the mind expands in awareness, it will also be able to imagine and experience greater things than those it had when holding the ideal to the flat earth scenario.

The potential for greater truth is always available. When the mind begins to free itself from belief and imagery based on isolation within parameters of experience, it will begin to expand awareness to the potential that exists. Then it will also find that any one specific state is simply the narrowing of potential to the identification within a state of consciousness.

Philosophically speaking then, what the eyes see and observe are only reflections of what potential is or isn't based on how the mind is connected to the instruments (observer [physical eyes]) and the ability to focus them in turn, based on how the mind is functioning.

We know that certain aspects of the mind when expanded lead to extraordinary abilities, such as those experienced with autism, clairvoyance or even in saintly prophets. wink.gif

On another note: Consciousness might be a "state" of matter..
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
modnerd
post May 31, 2015, 11:02 AM
Post #7


Newbie
*

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 9
Joined: May 31, 2015
From: S.VALLEY
Member No.: 37706



Wow guys, I am taken aback by the depth of your responses!
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 30th April 2017 - 08:26 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  ·  articles