Where does reality reside ?

[Thunderbird]

Gee... You know what, iNow... I really think I'm starting to understand where you're coming from when you say this. :confused:

Internal reflection ?

[modest]

When you just kept reffereing to positions of others that you felt comfortable with even when they were not relivent to my statements or querys.

 

I can talk to whomever I damn well please if it is something you are talking about or not. Mediating congruence from utter discord is clearly just an awful thing to do :confused:

 

This is how threads get off track by just scanning for the familer. This is why I neg reped you. This is not a about popularity or demorocy, its about debate.

 

First off, you didn't neg rep me - It would be fine if you'd like to. I am very secure in my reputation at Hypography. Secondly, I have argued nothing but the topic on this thread. Not every part of that was with you. I sharply disagreed with HydrogenBond while agreeing with Boerseun. I've taken the time to make my position clearly known going as far as drawing diagrams to depict it. No part of my conduct here can be shown as you describe it.

 

I think Einstein would agree with my position.

 

Which is why I brought up Einstein's hole argument.

 

You have only been parroting other's positions without thinking about the issue’s I have been attempting to raise .

If you going to create an argument for heavens sake make it you own.

 

Am I skirting the issues you raise? Who else engaged you on the topic of quantum mechanics? I've addressed your comments point by point.

 

And parroting other's positions? :) Am I parroting other's positions in posts 20, 28, 30, 35, 38, ect.? You are way off base here Thunderbird. "make it my own" is what I've done from the start of this thread.

 

Human eyes are clearly not the instigators of the planet earth when the latter predates people.

 

So, evidence doesn't support nothing-while-unobserved; Only no-observation-while-unobserved.

 

Radioactive isotopes decay at a predicted rate when unobserved therefore they exist for the predicted amount of unobserved time. My position is supported. As far as where you are going wrong - you are equating:

 

These systems do not depend on observation and you know it. You are unwilling to try and demonstrate what you're saying because you know it can't be done.

 

The thousands of miles of unobserved iron beneath my feet exists. I prove it by not falling to my death. To recap, the iron:1. is unobserved 2. exists

 

Something unobserved exists

 

It seems very telling that through all that disagreement you were not upset. Yet, in the last few posts I've tried to find agreement with your position saying "I infer that I have no further contention with you." and now you have fault with my style of dialog. That is very telling. :lol:

 

-modest

[Thunderbird]

In any case,

 

Boerseun's position above which is consistent with Einstein's Hole argument and the thoughts and opinions expressed by members here doesn't seem to be counter to your most recent esoteric stream of consciousness. As I support his very clearly stated position above, I infer that I have no further contention with you.

 

-modest

I do apologies for getting you mixed up with Reason.

 

 

 

 

In Einstein's own words:

 

"All our spacetime verifications invariably amount to a determination of spacetime coincidences. If, for example, events consisted merely in the motion of material points, then ultimately nothing would be observable but the meeting of two or more of these points." (Einstein, 1916, p.117).

 

So then what can be inferred by your inference of the hole argument as it applies to my contention of an observer.

 

You are still skirting that issue,

[Thunderbird]

 

 

It seems very telling that through all that disagreement you were not upset. Yet, in the last few posts I've tried to find agreement with your position saying "I infer that I have no further contention with you." and now you have fault with my style of dialog. That is very telling. :shade:

 

-modest

Why Do you find, no further contention with me. You could not possibly found all my contentions correct ? Explain...

[modest]

I do apologies for getting you mixed up with Reason.

 

Reason has articulated his position very well.

 

So then what can be inferred by your inference of the hole argument as it applies to my contention of an observer.

 

You are still skirting that issue,

 

I’m am not and have not skirted anything much less the hole argument that I just brought up. Nor is it even possible for me to “skirt that issue” of something I brought up by failing to relate it to your ideas.

 

You refuse to expand on your position.

 

Rather than addressing peoples critiques you either attack them or dismiss them with remarks like “If you say so” or “you’re chasing your tail”.

 

When someone tries to find common ground you flip out.

 

You’ve already been warned by Tormod. I honestly have absolutely no interest in expanding on the hole problem and continuing this nonsense. I’ve supported my positions and lost all desire for conversing on this topic (despite my interest in it).

 

-modest

[Thunderbird]

Reason has articulated his position very well.

 

 

 

I’m am not and have not skirted anything much less the hole argument that I just brought up. Nor is it even possible for me to “skirt that issue” of something I brought up by failing to relate it to your ideas.

 

You refuse to expand on your position.

 

Rather than addressing peoples critiques you either attack them or dismiss them with remarks like “If you say so” or “you’re chasing your tail”.

 

When someone tries to find common ground you flip out.

 

You’ve already been warned by Tormod. I honestly have absolutely no interest in expanding on the hole problem and continuing this nonsense. I’ve supported my positions and lost all desire for conversing on this topic (despite my interest in it).

 

-modest

Cowardly and evasive...:shade:.. no wonder I got you confused with Reason.

[REASON]

Looks like the only thing you're able to manifest in your bizaare reality T-bird is isolation. You do realize that you're only making yourself look foolish don't you? :shade:

 

 

Reality resides in the grey matter between our ears, not consciousness , consciousness is something that may be an inherent quality of the universe, and may have always existed.

 

I'd appreciate it if you would elaborate on this little gem of a statement you made in response to Boerseun's recent post about consciousness having evolved in our brains. I just have a few questions.

 

You say that "reality resides in the grey matter between our ears, not consciousness." Do you believe there is a physical reality, apart from your mind?

 

Can you be more specific about the nature of this eternal consciousness "that may be an inherent quality of the universe?"

 

Does this mean, for instance, that you and I are actually sharing a common consciousness, sort of like being plugged in to a mainframe, or is our consciousness individual more like a disconnected PC?

 

If "the universe is a manifestation of consciousness," what generated the consciousness prior to the universe's manifestation?

 

Is there any type of empirical information available to support such a claim as you have made above?

 

 

I'm very curious about this, and I think this is getting close to the heart of the matter for you, and I'd like to hear you explain it.

 

Please don't be evasive.

[Thunderbird]

Looks like the only thing you're able to manifest in your bizaare reality T-bird is isolation. You do realize that you're only making yourself look foolish don't you? :(

 

 

 

 

I'd appreciate it if you would elaborate on this little gem of a statement you made in response to Boerseun's recent post about consciousness having evolved in our brains. I just have a few questions.

 

You say that "reality resides in the grey matter between our ears, not consciousness." Do you believe there is a physical reality, apart from your mind?

 

Can you be more specific about the nature of this eternal consciousness "that may be an inherent quality of the universe?"

 

Does this mean, for instance, that you and I are actually sharing a common consciousness, sort of like being plugged in to a mainframe, or is our consciousness individual more like a disconnected PC?

 

If "the universe is a manifestation of consciousness," what generated the consciousness prior to the universe's manifestation?

 

Is there any type of empirical information available to support such a claim as you have made above?

 

 

I'm very curious about this, and I think this is getting close to the heart of the matter for you, and I'd like to hear you explain it.

 

Please don't be evasive.

I have my character flaws, Being evasive is not one. It would be to everyone's benefit to respond to what I am actually posting. There has been enough confusion generated by predispositions, Haveing a group stereotypical view point is also not one of my features.

Yes I am heading some where but I’m not sure where, I do know that I am further along with it than when I started the thread. If your alluding to the fact that I have an agenda, I do, it is to think out loud, so to speak with people that want to do the same. I do tend to think left brain about these type of matters to find symmetry and an order to things. I try to back up to see the forest after studying the trees, in order to see the whole picture. This is what I invite people to do if they want. This is counter intuitive for some, for some it is a good exercise depending on there own predispositions.

 

From my original contention that a point in space time is the fundamental first coordinate that gives an order of measurement to create a reality. I believe that Einstein’s hole argument, which I had to look up, can be utilized to prove that, but if we take that to use as a model for what is consciousness and what is reality, how do they relate. where does that leave us with knowledge of how best to look at the world.

 

Now a reductionist scientist, that calculates information and takes measurments for a living, will say “I do not care, I can still calculate” this is what they do, I am glad they do.

 

The questions I still have however has to do with consciousness , and this is an attempt to answerer your question.

 

Reality is just information we have assembled to evolved and to survive. It is in our program, and is particular to us, but outside of that is an infinity of space time coordinates. This view point is to me basic logic.

 

Taking this logic to encompass the phenomena of time I find is also completely tied to the phenomenon of our reality.

 

Remember according to basic laws of physics there is no separation of time into what is the memory of the past..... or the unknowns of the future, theses are purely our observations as a point in space time, moving on a shared particular path though time and space.

 

Outside of our experience as an “observer coordinate” there is no set clock ticking away, only an eternity, the clock is an internal clock, we are observing time because of this internal setting, a coordinate.

 

I made the statement that our reality resides inside of us, in our gray matter between our ears. yes it is.

 

Consciousness however is something we tap into, and also has always existed as a fundamental potential field.

The answerer is very basic, in that just as any waveform can be potential information, the spectrum of light is just basic palate we use to assemble our world, along with sound, so on and so on.. We tap into a basic infinity of these waves and collapse to a point of reference. This explains the wave particle duality we observe. the particle is a reflection of our coordinate. the wave a basic reflection of the eternal flux that surrounds us.

 

The question might be posed still that these waves are still contain specific information , like a tree falling the woods producing sound, well if you still think that it makes a sound without a coordinate of an observer after this thread that fine it doesn't mean you cannot experience life to the fullest possible measure. :(

[Thunderbird]

The question still is how could there be coordinate point before our own arrival on the scene.

 

Utilizing the logic above it has to do again with basic dualities that have always existed.

 

The duality of an eternal point, the singularity,... and the pure potential of the infinity of space time, one cannot exist without the other.

 

The big bang point of origin, is our observation of this very basic duality that builds complexity outward. Just as you can observe in any hierarchal system.

 

From this basic duality all complexity is derived, and this point is center everywhere in the universe, no matter where you are in the universe. keep in mind that our experience of time is only our experience. We can just as easily say the big bang point is a feature of our temporal perception. why wouldn't it be it is our memory so to speak in that this is any point’s original eternal internal point of reference.

[REASON]

It would be to everyone's benefit to respond to what I am actually posting. There has been enough confusion generated by predispositions, Haveing a group stereotypical view point is also not one of my features.

 

I believe people have been resonding to what you are posting. I feel I have. This is a group discussion. It is a dialogue for sure and can become a debate. People do have predispositions (opinions), and you shouldn't be surprised if that's how their posts are oriented. And they may disagree, strongly even. If you do not feel you are being understood, than you should state as much, and clarify your position.

 

I understand not always wanting to follow the crowd, but I also understand that by doing so, I'm likely to find myself in the minority position, and It may require that I have to be a bit more thorough in defending my point of view. But it is also wise for me to be open to the fact that I may be wrong, and be willing to consider an alternate point of view, even if it is held by a consensus.

 

I do wonder though if you've considered what makes you feel the need to always wander off the beaten path. Sometimes, it's a path that leads to nowhere and you find yourself out on a limb. :) Personally, I've felt that while it's fun to explore new territory, it's a good idea to stay somewhat grounded to avoid getting lost. But hey, that's just me.

 

 

The questions I still have however has to do with consciousness , and this is an attempt to answerer your question.

 

Reality is just information we have assembled to evolved and to survive. It is in our program, and is particular to us, but outside of that is an infinity of space time coordinates. This view point is to me basic logic.

 

Taking this logic to encompass the phenomena of time I find is also completely tied to the phenomenon of our reality.

 

You see, here's where you and I differ somewhat. I don't think reality is just information we have mentally assembled. As I have said, I think there are two distinct realities (distinct but not necessarily at odds with one another).

 

1. There is what I call, Actual Reality, which is the substantive reality of the natural universe made up of finite chemical elements that exists in various proximities to one another, and interact with one another through various energetic means, and are governed by physical laws. We can see that these elements are capable of forming highly complex structures at both a micro and macro level.

 

Some of these complex chemical structures developed feedback capabilities and began to respond to the surrounding environment while altering their form. Through this process, they became more-and-more efficient at making modifications to the point they could make copies of themselves, and the first life forms came about.

 

As life forms became more-and-more complex, they developed sophisticated sensors that were able to analyze the surrounding environment. It became necessary to consume in order to generate the energy required to be sustained, and sensing the environment is a means to accomplish this. The better the sensors, the better the opportunity for survival and thus, diversification. These sensors are part of the nervous system that transmits electrochemical information, that is processed and stored in the brain.

 

Over time it became advantageous to retain sensory information, and some species continued to generate more complex sensory features that could gather large quantities of information from the surrounding environment, and the brain corresponded in becoming more advanced in its ability to retain and sort the sensory input. The ability for a brain to process combinations of sensory data, I think, gave rise to a limited consciousness or awareness, but virtually no understanding.

 

This mental progression has continued to expand in the human brain to the point at which it can electrochemically process billions of bits of information simultaneously, producing a comprehensive observation of the surrounding environment, and thus with the ability of information storage, or memory, an advanced sense of awareness and consciousness. To me, consciousness is really born of contemplation or thought, which is beyond basic awareness and relies heavily on memory for comparative analyses. This conscious awareness is individual to each of us, and as we analyze the Actual Reality of our surrounding environment, we develop our individual perception of it.

 

This leads to the second reality which can be referred to as:

 

2. Individual Reality. Our Individual Reality is entirely based on a combination of our individual mental perception of Actual Reality and our imagination, each of which are formed of the sum total of accumulated information in our brains. From this we form our beliefs about the surrounding world. While we are all in observance of the same Actual Reality, each of us can perceive various aspects of it uniquely as a result of our individual experiences, and thus our unique accumulation of information. It is our Individual Reality that distorts Actual Reality because our mental perception may be lacking information or understanding, limiting our ability to make mental connections and increase our conscious awareness.

 

While Actual Reality has not been, and may never be, completely defined, the scientific method has been an invaluable tool that has rapidly advanced our understanding, and thus our consciousness, to the nature of Actual Reality. That understanding remains in constant review and subject to change.

 

But essentially, I believe it should be understood that Individual Reality is created and shaped by conscious thought, which is generated by a functioning brain, which developed over time from the natural elements and energy that comprises Actual Reality.

 

 

Remember according to basic laws of physics there is no separation of time into what is the memory of the past..... or the unknowns of the future, theses are purely our observations as a point in space time, moving on a shared particular path though time and space.

 

I agree, but would add that there is empirical information available to us that reveals that Actual Reality existed prior to any known conscious awareness of it. While nothing may have been there to consciously observe and quantify time, time existed relative to the proximity and movement of objects, and delays in the transfer of energy. It takes a period of time for photons to reach the Earth from the Sun due to their proximity. We, as conscious observers, have gained an awareness of this period through scientific inquiry, and defined it as approximately eight minutes. It could just as easily be defined as 480 seconds. Even though these are distinct descriptions, they each represent the same period of time that exists in Actual Reality for photons to travel from the Sun to the Earth. The fact that it has been consciously observed and defined has no bearing on the Actual Reality of the speed of light, and the associated time it takes to cover a distance.

 

The same could be said for the periods of objects moving in relationship to one another such as an orbiting planet. Conscious observer or not, a period of time accumulates as the Earth completes an orbit around the sun. This time is relative to the proximity of these two objects, and the speed of the orbiting object. We, as conscious observers, have defined that period of time, but that period no less exists without our definition.

 

 

Outside of our experience as an “observer coordinate” there is no set clock ticking away, only an eternity, the clock is an internal clock, we are observing time because of this internal setting, a coordinate.

 

I agree that there is not a set clock other than the way in which time occurs relative to the interaction of matter and/or energy.

 

 

I made the statement that our reality resides inside of us, in our gray matter between our ears. yes it is.

 

I agree that our Individual Reality does reside in our minds. Actual Reality exists independent of our minds.

 

 

Consciousness however is something we tap into, and also has always existed as a fundamental potential field.

The answerer is very basic, in that just as any waveform can be potential information, the spectrum of light is just basic palate we use to assemble our world, along with sound, so on and so on.. We tap into a basic infinity of these waves and collapse to a point of reference. This explains the wave particle duality we observe. the particle is a reflection of our coordinate. the wave a basic reflection of the eternal flux that surrounds us.

 

I'm really not following this line of thinking. What is the power behind this consciousness we are supposedly tapping into that has always existed? What is this "eternal flux that surrounds us?" Is there anything we have to examine other than the concept of these things? Mathematical calculations even?

 

I don't expect that someone with no vision or hearing has the same perception of reality as I do. Their sensory experience is limited to touch, taste, and smell. Their consciousness of Actual Reality is significantly limited by not possessing these other important sensory features, and their Individual Reality is distorted by comparison.

 

If someone were born with no senses whatsoever, it is hard for me to imagine that they would ever have any real consciousness, even if they were alive with a functioning brain, because they would have no awarness of Actual Reality, which is going on around them. There would be no way for them to accumulate any information.

 

 

The question might be posed still that these waves are still contain specific information , like a tree falling the woods producing sound, well if you still think that it makes a sound without a coordinate of an observer after this thread that fine it doesn't mean you cannot experience life to the fullest possible measure. :shrug:

 

You appear to have come full circle here with this statement. Let's be clear about this. There are trees that exist in Actual Reality, which means they can exist apart from a conscious observer. There is plenty of evidence that trees fall in the forest. Trees have been oberved both as having fallen in the past, and while falling. When someone with functional hearing observes a tree falling in the forest, the sound waves generated by the event vibrates the eardrums and is sensed as noise in the mind of the conscious observer. There is no reason to believe that sound waves would not also be generated by a tree falling in the forest where there happens to be no conscious observer. There just wouldn't be any perceived noise.

 

 

The question still is how could there be coordinate point before our own arrival on the scene.

 

Utilizing the logic above it has to do again with basic dualities that have always existed.

 

The duality of an eternal point, the singularity,... and the pure potential of the infinity of space time, one cannot exist without the other.

 

The big bang point of origin, is our observation of this very basic duality that builds complexity outward. Just as you can observe in any hierarchal system.

 

From this basic duality all complexity is derived, and this point is center everywhere in the universe, no matter where you are in the universe. keep in mind that our experience of time is only our experience. We can just as easily say the big bang point is a feature of our temporal perception. why wouldn't it be it is our memory so to speak in that this is any point’s original eternal internal point of reference.

 

I apologize, but I find these concepts very confusing and ambiguous. We don't even know for sure that the Big Bang actually occurred.

 

As I see it, the Universe does not require a defined coordinate point to exist. It exists as a relationship of matter and energy. Defining coordinate points is the business of conscious obervers attempting to orient themselves within the vast expanse, and to identify the relationships of key components.

[Moontanman]

I came across this gem while I was looking for something else. maybe reality does any exist in the brain.

 

Big Brain Theory: A naked brain floating in space! | The News is NowPublic.com :shrug:

[Thunderbird]

You are describing a progression of complexity though time. This is merely a reflection of our predisposition to see phenomenon as related in linear events from past to future. This is not actually reality but a view based on a perspective. You could just as easily described these phenomenon as a non-linear system with the connections and information moving simultaneously to all other points, regardless of space or time constraints, these constraints are again led by our feed back system of a three stage cycle of......

 

Collapsing an unbounded flux of pure probabilities into a bounded coordinate point of reference.

Crystallizing a recursive pattern of relationships feeding back to the coordinate information.

 

Information aligns from the flux to accommodated preexisting patterns of the particular point.

 

This is a cyclical recursive system. What you have proposed as an Individual Reality as a separate system from the system of the feed back does not exist outside this loop but resides inside the system of a point of reference.

 

 

 

Any phenomena we observe is subject to what we have previously observed

An observer from the point of the singularity could see all things of the evolutionary process happening at once. This view point could define life as sphere containing

all evolutionary “events” as internal functions bound to a coordinate point.

 

Since there is an infinite possible coordinates, there are an infinity of possible realities. Just as a seed of a particular tree will assemble the periodic table of elements to conform to a very specific pattern based on memory of past patterns.

The conscious observer can only assemble a world of reality based on a memory pattern.

[Moontanman]

You are describing a progression of complexity though time. This is merely a reflection of our predisposition to see phenomenon as related in linear events from past to future. This is not actually reality but a view based on a perspective. You could just as easily described these phenomenon as a non-linear system with the connections and information moving simultaneously to all other points, regardless of space or time constraints, these constraints are again led by our feed back system of a three stage cycle of......

 

Collapsing an unbounded flux of pure probabilities into a bounded coordinate point of reference.

Crystallizing a recursive pattern of relationships feeding back to the coordinate information.

 

Information aligns from the flux to accommodated preexisting patterns of the particular point.

 

This is a cyclical recursive system. What you have proposed as an Individual Reality as a separate system from the system of the feed back does not exist outside this loop but resides inside the system of a point of reference.

 

 

 

Any phenomena we observe is subject to what we have previously observed

An observer from the point of the singularity could see all things of the evolutionary process happening at once. This view point could define life as sphere containing

all evolutionary “events” as internal functions bound to a coordinate point.

 

Since there is an infinite possible coordinates, there are an infinity of possible realities. Just as a seed of a particular tree will assemble the periodic table of elements to conform to a very specific pattern based on memory of past patterns.

The conscious observer can only assemble a world of reality based on a memory pattern.

 

T-bird, only you would have taken that link literally or even seriously. I'll give you an "A" for effort, if nothing else you really do take this seriously and I respect that:)

[Thunderbird]

Reason You appear to have come full circle here with this statement. Let's be clear about this. There are trees that exist in Actual Reality, which means they can exist apart from a conscious observer.

The "tree" is inside your head and must conform to the feed back of structures of memory.

The "tree’ structure is connected to a pattern of possibilities that we posses. Its point of reference is also connected to a infinite flux. The bird does not perceive a tree as we do. A mole would not perceive a tree as we do. They would assemble the tree as it reflects its own internal patterns. The bird, mole and man may share certain patterns based opon shared systems, but this systems are culled from the closely related origins of space time coordinates. We assemble the tree. It assembles itself, but what we assemble is from our point of reference, our personal pattern. we can observe only because we have a relationship within ourselves to a particular pattern culled from an infinity of probabilities.

 

 

 

There is plenty of evidence that trees fall in the forest. Trees have been oberved both as having fallen in the past, and while falling. When someone with functional hearing observes a tree falling in the forest, the sound waves generated by the event vibrates the eardrums and is sensed as noise in the mind of the conscious observer. There is no reason to believe that sound waves would not also be generated by a tree falling in the forest where there happens to be no conscious observer. There just wouldn't be any perceived noise.

 

 

An observer by proxy. does not negate the original observer.

[Thunderbird]

T-bird, only you would have taken that link literally or even seriously. I'll give you an "A" for effort, if nothing else you really do take this seriously and I respect that:)

The link you gave above ? good link.:eek_big:

[Tormod]

I fell out of this thread a while back, but recently read a book which reminded me of it: Scarlett Thomas' "The end of Mr Y". It's the answer to the prayers of everyone who's posting here.

 

Hypography Science Bookstore - Books - The End of Mr. Y

 

Highly recommended. Just don't forget that it's a work of fiction.