Jump to page: 1 26  
Page
Thread overview
Totally OT: Quantum Mechanics proof for the existence of a Supreme Conciousness?
Feb 14, 2008
Craig Black
Feb 14, 2008
Bill Baxter
Feb 14, 2008
Craig Black
Feb 14, 2008
bearophile
Feb 14, 2008
Craig Black
Feb 14, 2008
bearophile
Feb 14, 2008
Craig Black
Feb 14, 2008
BCS
Feb 14, 2008
Craig Black
Feb 14, 2008
boyd
Feb 14, 2008
bearophile
Feb 14, 2008
boyd
Feb 14, 2008
Craig Black
Feb 14, 2008
Jb
Feb 14, 2008
Yigal Chripun
Feb 14, 2008
Craig Black
Feb 14, 2008
Jb
Feb 14, 2008
Yigal Chripun
Feb 14, 2008
Jb
Feb 15, 2008
Bill Baxter
Feb 15, 2008
boyd
Feb 15, 2008
Jb
Feb 15, 2008
Yigal Chripun
Feb 15, 2008
Jb
Feb 15, 2008
Yigal Chripun
Feb 15, 2008
Yigal Chripun
Feb 15, 2008
Jb
Re: Totally OT: Quantum Mechanics proof for the existence of a Supreme
Feb 15, 2008
Daniel Lewis
Feb 15, 2008
Yigal Chripun
Feb 14, 2008
Yigal Chripun
Feb 14, 2008
Gregor Richards
Feb 14, 2008
Craig Black
Feb 15, 2008
Don Clugston
Feb 15, 2008
Aarti_pl
Feb 15, 2008
Yigal Chripun
Feb 15, 2008
Aarti_pl
Feb 15, 2008
Don Clugston
Feb 15, 2008
Jb
Feb 15, 2008
user
Feb 16, 2008
Christopher Wright
Re: Totally OT: Quantum Mechanics proof for the existence of a Supreme
Feb 15, 2008
Daniel Lewis
Feb 15, 2008
downs
Feb 15, 2008
Craig Black
Feb 15, 2008
user
Feb 15, 2008
Edward Diener
Feb 16, 2008
Craig Black
Feb 16, 2008
Craig Black
Feb 16, 2008
Edward Diener
Feb 18, 2008
Craig Black
Feb 16, 2008
Sergey Gromov
Feb 16, 2008
Craig Black
February 14, 2008
I apologize for the inappropriate post, but I read this material last night and am still buzzing about it.  I just have to share it.  I personally am an agnostic, so not trying to preach anything, but I thought this was very interesting.  I didn't realize that modern science has such a solid theory about consciousness.  Namely, that there is only one conscious mind in the universe, and that matter is the result of observations of that mind.  At the subatomic level, there are only possibilities that require a mind to bring into actual reality.  And that mind is not Many but One.  The universe essentially consists of a single Indivisible Mind from which matter emmanates.

Are these the ramblings of a deluded philosopher or religious cult?  Nope. The conclusions that result due to observations and discoveries made by Werner Heisenberg, Erwin Schrödinger, and Niels Bohr, all pioneers of quantum mechanics.

http://www.integralscience.org/ConsciousQM.html

-Craig


February 14, 2008
Craig Black wrote:
> I apologize for the inappropriate post, but I read this material last night and am still buzzing about it.  I just have to share it.  I personally am an agnostic, so not trying to preach anything, but I thought this was very interesting.  I didn't realize that modern science has such a solid theory about consciousness.  Namely, that there is only one conscious mind in the universe, and that matter is the result of observations of that mind.  At the subatomic level, there are only possibilities that require a mind to bring into actual reality.  And that mind is not Many but One.  The universe essentially consists of a single Indivisible Mind from which matter emmanates.
> 
> Are these the ramblings of a deluded philosopher or religious cult?  Nope. The conclusions that result due to observations and discoveries made by Werner Heisenberg, Erwin Schrödinger, and Niels Bohr, all pioneers of quantum mechanics.

... and then re-interpreted by a deluded philosopher / religious cult.

> http://www.integralscience.org/ConsciousQM.html


Sorry, couldn't resist.  :-)


I really enjoyed the book "The Dancing Wu Li Masters" when I read it 10 years ago or so.  I think there are a number of books of the same ilk that try to tie quantum mechanics to things like consciousness or mysticism.  It's interesting but from what I've seen there isn't anything like a "solid theory of consciousness" that's got any scientific rigor to it.   But my data is about 10 years old.  Things do change.

--bb
February 14, 2008
"Bill Baxter" <dnewsgroup@billbaxter.com> wrote in message news:fp1s4l$28uh$1@digitalmars.com...
> Craig Black wrote:
>> I apologize for the inappropriate post, but I read this material last night and am still buzzing about it.  I just have to share it.  I personally am an agnostic, so not trying to preach anything, but I thought this was very interesting.  I didn't realize that modern science has such a solid theory about consciousness.  Namely, that there is only one conscious mind in the universe, and that matter is the result of observations of that mind.  At the subatomic level, there are only possibilities that require a mind to bring into actual reality.  And that mind is not Many but One.  The universe essentially consists of a single Indivisible Mind from which matter emmanates.
>>
>> Are these the ramblings of a deluded philosopher or religious cult? Nope. The conclusions that result due to observations and discoveries made by Werner Heisenberg, Erwin Schrödinger, and Niels Bohr, all pioneers of quantum mechanics.
>
> ... and then re-interpreted by a deluded philosopher / religious cult.
>
>> http://www.integralscience.org/ConsciousQM.html
>
>
> Sorry, couldn't resist.  :-)
>
>
> I really enjoyed the book "The Dancing Wu Li Masters" when I read it 10 years ago or so.  I think there are a number of books of the same ilk that try to tie quantum mechanics to things like consciousness or mysticism. It's interesting but from what I've seen there isn't anything like a "solid theory of consciousness" that's got any scientific rigor to it. But my data is about 10 years old.  Things do change.
>
> --bb

I would like to hear more about your perspective on this matter.  It is all very new to me.  And like I said I am completely agnostic. I have heard that Schrodinger stated that, "The number of minds in the universe is One."  What is your take on this?

-Craig



February 14, 2008
Craig Black wrote:
> I apologize for the inappropriate post, but I read this material last night and am still buzzing about it.  I just have to share it.  I personally am an agnostic, so not trying to preach anything, but I thought this was very interesting.  I didn't realize that modern science has such a solid theory about consciousness.  Namely, that there is only one conscious mind in the universe, and that matter is the result of observations of that mind.  At the subatomic level, there are only possibilities that require a mind to bring into actual reality.  And that mind is not Many but One.  The universe essentially consists of a single Indivisible Mind from which matter emmanates.
> 
> Are these the ramblings of a deluded philosopher or religious cult?  Nope. The conclusions that result due to observations and discoveries made by Werner Heisenberg, Erwin Schrödinger, and Niels Bohr, all pioneers of quantum mechanics.
> 
> http://www.integralscience.org/ConsciousQM.html
> 
> -Craig
> 
> 

I have not read the link but I did read a short story a week or so ago about someone playing the Schrödinger's cat trick with a super plague and all of humanity. The punch line is that everyone involved decides that if all knowledge about the experiment is destroyed that the world would be saved. So they kill each other.

This should remarkably like the "watching dark matter can shorten the life of the universe" buzz from a few months back.
February 14, 2008
Craig Black:
> What is your take on this?

I suggest you to a library and fetch a book by Antonio Damasio or Gerald Edelman, and later you can read some university manual about neurobiology, so you can start learning something real about such matters.
You will find that while the global problem isn't solved yet, there are many things we already know about the underling subsystems.

Bye,
bearophile
February 14, 2008
"BCS" <BCS@pathlink.com> wrote in message news:fp206p$5sv$1@digitalmars.com...
> Craig Black wrote:
>> I apologize for the inappropriate post, but I read this material last night and am still buzzing about it.  I just have to share it.  I personally am an agnostic, so not trying to preach anything, but I thought this was very interesting.  I didn't realize that modern science has such a solid theory about consciousness.  Namely, that there is only one conscious mind in the universe, and that matter is the result of observations of that mind.  At the subatomic level, there are only possibilities that require a mind to bring into actual reality.  And that mind is not Many but One.  The universe essentially consists of a single Indivisible Mind from which matter emmanates.
>>
>> Are these the ramblings of a deluded philosopher or religious cult? Nope. The conclusions that result due to observations and discoveries made by Werner Heisenberg, Erwin Schrödinger, and Niels Bohr, all pioneers of quantum mechanics.
>>
>> http://www.integralscience.org/ConsciousQM.html
>>
>> -Craig
>>
>>
>
> I have not read the link but I did read a short story a week or so ago about someone playing the Schrödinger's cat trick with a super plague and all of humanity. The punch line is that everyone involved decides that if all knowledge about the experiment is destroyed that the world would be saved. So they kill each other.
>
> This should remarkably like the "watching dark matter can shorten the life of the universe" buzz from a few months back.

lol!  I know it's easy to moc an idea that is so far removed from our every day experience.  However, it would be nice to hear a skeptic that has an cohesive intelligent counterargument to one or more of the ideas presented. These observations do not seem to me to pulled out of thin air.  However, I should try to dissect them further to check for inconsistencies.

-Craig


February 14, 2008
"bearophile" <bearophileHUGS@lycos.com> wrote in message news:fp22l8$2pvm$1@digitalmars.com...
> Craig Black:
>> What is your take on this?
>
> I suggest you to a library and fetch a book by Antonio Damasio or Gerald
> Edelman, and later you can read some university manual about neurobiology,
> so you can start learning something real about such matters.
> You will find that while the global problem isn't solved yet, there are
> many things we already know about the underling subsystems.
>
> Bye,
> bearophile

The fact that there are correlations between neurons firing and consciousness is a profound observation.  However, it doesn't really address the ideas presented, unless I am missing something.  Furthermore, the assumption that the configuration of matter known as the brain is the cause of consciousness may be fundamentally flawed if the ideas presented in this link are correct.  You may be completely right about your assertion that "the global problem isn't solved yet".  However, that assertion by itself is not very convincing, at least to me.


February 14, 2008
It seems to me that quantum physics is just an admittance that we don't really know what the heck is going on. It's not science, it's philosophy. And the thing about the mind sounds a lot like the main principle of the philosopher Descartes: 'there's only one thing that I can be sure about: I think, therefore I exist'

This isn't proof of the existence of anything. In fact, it's more a theory that nothing can truly be proven. Any proof is based on what we can observe, but we can't be sure that anything we observe actually is.

Greetz,
Boyd.

----
On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 17:47:27 +0100, Craig Black <cblack@ara.com> wrote:

> I apologize for the inappropriate post, but I read this material last night
> and am still buzzing about it.  I just have to share it.  I personally am an
> agnostic, so not trying to preach anything, but I thought this was very
> interesting.  I didn't realize that modern science has such a solid theory
> about consciousness.  Namely, that there is only one conscious mind in the
> universe, and that matter is the result of observations of that mind.  At
> the subatomic level, there are only possibilities that require a mind to
> bring into actual reality.  And that mind is not Many but One.  The universe
> essentially consists of a single Indivisible Mind from which matter
> emmanates.
>
> Are these the ramblings of a deluded philosopher or religious cult?  Nope.
> The conclusions that result due to observations and discoveries made by
> Werner Heisenberg, Erwin Schrödinger, and Niels Bohr, all pioneers of
> quantum mechanics.
>
> http://www.integralscience.org/ConsciousQM.html
>
> -Craig
February 14, 2008
I haven't read the link but my view on such issues (as an atheist)  is
as follows:
science deals only with certain questions, namely ones he can find an
answer to, other questions are just left to philosophy.
from your description that links falls under the realm of the latter
more than the former.
the Schrödinger cat experiment for example is a way to illustrate
Heisenberg's uncertainty law. It's a way to explain statistics.
science uses math as a language to express concepts, for example we use
fields to explain magnetism but that does not mean that there's such a
thing as a magnetic field, cause a field is just another mathematical
entity, nothing more.
trying to extract any philosophical ideas out of those ideas and math
concepts is wrong as it violates Okham's razor principal and is not science.
As I've stated already, those are my views only, and I of course do not
want to insult anyone's beliefs. I just prefer the science continue
expanding our understanding of the universe while our philosophy
continues to debate other questions and those remain separated.

--Yigal

PS - http://digg.com/comedy/Atheist_Sees_Image_of_Big_Bang_in_Piece_of_Toast



Craig Black wrote:
> I apologize for the inappropriate post, but I read this material last night and am still buzzing about it.  I just have to share it.  I personally am an agnostic, so not trying to preach anything, but I thought this was very interesting.  I didn't realize that modern science has such a solid theory about consciousness.  Namely, that there is only one conscious mind in the universe, and that matter is the result of observations of that mind.  At the subatomic level, there are only possibilities that require a mind to bring into actual reality.  And that mind is not Many but One.  The universe essentially consists of a single Indivisible Mind from which matter emmanates.
>
> Are these the ramblings of a deluded philosopher or religious cult?  Nope. The conclusions that result due to observations and discoveries made by Werner Heisenberg, Erwin Schrödinger, and Niels Bohr, all pioneers of quantum mechanics.
>
> http://www.integralscience.org/ConsciousQM.html
>
> -Craig
>
>
> 
February 14, 2008
Craig Black:
> The fact that there are correlations between neurons firing and consciousness is a profound observation.

It was profound 200-300 years ago, today it's well known, like many other things in science.


> However, it doesn't really address the ideas presented, unless I am missing something.

You are probably missing some things, that's why reading a big university manual about neurobiology may help you.


> Furthermore, the assumption that the configuration of matter known as the brain is the cause of consciousness may be fundamentally flawed

A very important part is the configuration of the activation patterns too, that the dynamic state too, it includes the electrical fields of the many charges that create that chemistry dance too.
I think you are making the phenomenon of consciousness more mysterious and strange than necessary. Learning more about nematode and aplysia nervous systems may help you see that the situation is quite more mundane, despite being really complex anyway.
In the end quantum mechanics may have some role in animal brains (but I know no concrete facts about this has being found so far), but surely that's not the most important layer of the reality you have to look at if you want to understand how a living brain works (like a grizzly brain). You have to learn about signal processing, neural dynamics, neural groups, neural networks, neurology, neurobiology, linguistics, sociology... :-)

Bye,
bearophile
« First   ‹ Prev
1 2 3 4 5 6