Dr. Doug Matzke, Quantum Computers and Extended Consciousness |487|

#61
All of this is too far outside his familiar playground for this Christian to contribute much to the conversation. But I pray that certain members of humanity do not unlock more of the knowledge best kept pray God forbidden, lest we become yet more doomed than we are. We need first to overcome permanently the ever lurking Darkness within yet too many of us; the eagerness to steal, to kill and much worse.
***
Your post made me smile. You pray man does not unlock more knowledge? Well, that's not going to happen. We have Mr.Gates & his kind at the wheel & I think that ship has sailed.
 
#63
Well going back in time, Newton speculated that light consisted of a stream of particles, but then gradually people observed wave like behaviour that didn't make sense if light were particles. Then Einstein demonstrated the for light of any particular colour, light energy came in multiples of X, like X,2*X, 10*X, etc, but you never got light (of the given colour) with energy X/2 or whatever. That seemed to settle the matter - light was composed of particles, which he called photons. However the wave like properties didn't go away, and when you pass monochromatic light through two slits, you do indeed get an interference pattern on the other side. Basically that didn't make sense, and caused the development of a weird new theory called quantum mechanics. Obviously the next question was whether photons interfered with each other or whether the interference pattern would still build up if you weakened the beam of light so much that only one photon was in the apparatus at any one time - and yes, that still gave an interference pattern! That is why people talk about light being both a wave and a particle phenomenon.

Electrons are very different from photons, for starters, a beam of electricity in a vacuum bends in a magnetic field, and is pulled (accelerated) in an electric field. It was discovered that electricity (electric charge) also comes in well defined chunks that were dubbed 'electrons', so the obvious question was whether electrons could also behave like waves. The answer is yes, so electrons and photons both have the strange duality. I think scientists back then put a lot of effort into trying to show that this interpretation was a mistake, because I suppose QM back then was weird, just as psychic phenomena are considered weird now. QM has stood the test of time - that is how matter works. Psychic phenomena also seem to be impossible to explain away - which is why I think at some point science is going to have to come to terms with them.


David
David, you have an amazing ability to clarify complex topics. I do not completely understand this double slit experiment yet, but you have have pointed me in the right direction. Thanks man.
 
#64
You are absolutely right, Shane. Our cache of thoughts is the one domain we may yet claim exclusively as being masters of, regardless of societal pressures.
Personal experience has taught me however, to be flexible and open to thought adjustments at anytime during life. I never believed in demonic possession until I encountered a person who left me with no doubt that they were. I was age 44 when I had that experience. From the same person I learned that astral projection, sometimes referred to as remote viewing is a fact. I also learned that good triumphs over evil if we, as Creator's children desire from the Creator that it should.
Hi Gary. I just began to post my personal stories of paranormal experiences on this site. Although I do not consider myself Christian, I am certainly not one of the those materialists. Go check it out and let me know what you think.

Your friend,

Shane
 
#70
***
Your post made me smile. You pray man does not unlock more knowledge? Well, that's not going to happen. We have Mr.Gates & his kind at the wheel & I think that ship has sailed.
You're right Atlantis. Prayer has revealed knowledge to me but not quite enough to say we are definitely doomed. Knowing Mr. Gates and his kind are presently at the helm of the good ship America offers me nothing in in the way of reassurance. A tiny morsel of consolation is offered by clinging desperately to the belief good must somehow eventually triumph over the ambient, confining, ever darkening, global evil.
 
#72
I basically agree with that - but it would be nicer to see it written down.

I think at heart I believe in Idealism, but I just think it is an impossible theory to apply at this stage of mental/consciousness science. The problem is that it seems to let consciousness alter anything as it sees fit - like super PK if you like. We need some constraints on that even to make a scientific theory at all.

If the 'normal' physical world is a product of the many interactions between conscious fragments, then something that we can call the non-physical world - accessed for example in NDE's - presumably is also. I think science should work on that hypothesis, and only then try to unify the result using the concept of Idealism.

David
 
#73
I basically agree with that - but it would be nicer to see it written down.
Yes, there is certainly a lot to unpack in that short presentation.

I think at heart I believe in Idealism, but I just think it is an impossible theory to apply at this stage of mental/consciousness science. The problem is that it seems to let consciousness alter anything as it sees fit - like super PK if you like. We need some constraints on that even to make a scientific theory at all.
I think one of those constraints is as you mention the implication of being able to change anything in reality. The way I see it is that individual conscious agents are themselves residing within the consciousness of the all. While as individuals we may be able to alter the outcome of the double slit experiment as in Dean Radin's experiment but we certainly cannot change the fundamental laws of the universe. Just as we on a personal level we are limited in control of our own subconscious minds. Since our consciousness and apparent "physical" being is within the consciousness of the all we cannot change the laws of the universe anymore than our own dream alters can manipulate our own personal dreams.

For sure there are limits as far as a scientific theory goes, but perhaps it is merely a shift in perspective. How that could be quantified into a working testable / falsifiable theory I am not sure. At the moment we can only say which is the most parsimonious view of the facts.

If the 'normal' physical world is a product of the many interactions between conscious fragments, then something that we can call the non-physical world - accessed for example in NDE's - presumably is also. I think science should work on that hypothesis, and only then try to unify the result using the concept of Idealism.

David
I think that is probably correct, remembering also that conscious fragments are also within consciousness as a whole, or within the all.
 
#74
Okay... So the video concluded by saying there is no reality beyond Consciousness. Well, we know Consciousness predates all matter as the assembly of matter as we perceive it required Consciousness. We also know that we as individuals contain a spark of this Consciousness otherwise we are unconscious. Thus we may assume we are part of Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. Spiritually we are eternal.
 
Last edited:
#75
Okay... So the video concluded by saying there is no reality beyond Consciousness. Well, we know Consciousness predates all matter as the assembly of matter as we perceive it required Consciousness. We also know that we as individuals contain a spark of this Consciousness otherwise we are unconscious. Thus we may assume we are part of Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. We are eternal.
I agree, the only thing I would say differently is that matter itself is within consciousness. Then again I suppose that would be a requirement. :)

The perspective shift is simply acknowledging that reality exists in consciousness over the idea that consciousness exists in a unrealized proposed external reality. When you follow it to it's conclusions then certainly death is an illusion.
 
#77
A tiny morsel of consolation is offered by clinging desperately to the belief good must somehow eventually triumph over the ambient, confining, ever darkening, global evil.
Garry, you should listen to this interview with philosopher Neil Kramer from December.

He goes into detail how Evil is basically just abiding Lies. And, as you know, Lies cannot and do not stand forever. Truth always prevails...

 
#78
Garry, you should listen to this interview with philosopher Neil Kramer from December.

He goes into detail how Evil is basically just abiding Lies. And, as you know, Lies cannot and do not stand forever. Truth always prevails...

Of course, with capital-T "Truth" being something that you has willfully chosen, Charlie. What else can it be, after all? ;)

Has to disappoint you, Charlie - there is no singular, universal, absolute "Truth" out there. Belief in the "universal Truth" is the ultimate mistake, forced on us by certain agressively expansionist, power-willing networks of social interaction; What manifests itself behind each claim of "the Absolute Truth" is the certain Selves' covert and frustrated Will to Power, moving toward establishing its forceful Reign over the counteracting Will to Freedom manifested by the Others.

What is "true" and what is "false" is always conditional - this is, defined with, and identified by, a set of criteria which itself cannot be justified by itself, being literally based on nothing - or, more precisely, on Nothingness, from which Self creates it-Self with its Will. It is this very Self's wilfulness which lies at the bedrock of all criteria - be they of "truth", or "goodness", or "beauty", or whatever else

And, so, each particular Self constructs its own specific set of arbitrarily formulated criteria, which defines and identifies "the Truth" that is voluntaristically created by the Self.

Of course, since there is a countless multitude of Selves in actual existence, and the experientially manifested world is created not by one of them, but by all of them working together (but not perfectly harmonically - and this is the reason our world, despite its apparent stability and structure, occasionally mainfests weird "glitches" which we call "paranormal phenomena"), each of the Selves has to deal not just with its own set of criteria of "trueness", but also with the ones created by Others (this means, other Selves). So, it can modify and reshape its own criteria in accordance with its acceptance or rejection of some Others' criteria, thus making social communication somewhat possible (even if with many difficulties and only to a certain degree).

And even in a social communication it is always a particular Self's willful choice - whether to accept or to reject, partially or fully, the criteria proposed or imposed by some of the Others.
 
Last edited:
#79
Of course, with capital-T "Truth" being something that you has willfully chosen, Charlie. What else can it be, after all? ;)
Indeed. You and I can indeed agree upon the Truth of what will happen if I put my Sig Sauer to your head and pull the trigger.

Your billions of selves currently inhabiting the billions of different dimensions are fun to think about, but one of them matters most.



I'm happy you are overcoming your Nihilism and beginning to accept that Truth exists. :)
 
#80
Yes, there is certainly a lot to unpack in that short presentation.



I think one of those constraints is as you mention the implication of being able to change anything in reality. The way I see it is that individual conscious agents are themselves residing within the consciousness of the all. While as individuals we may be able to alter the outcome of the double slit experiment as in Dean Radin's experiment but we certainly cannot change the fundamental laws of the universe. Just as we on a personal level we are limited in control of our own subconscious minds. Since our consciousness and apparent "physical" being is within the consciousness of the all we cannot change the laws of the universe anymore than our own dream alters can manipulate our own personal dreams.

For sure there are limits as far as a scientific theory goes, but perhaps it is merely a shift in perspective. How that could be quantified into a working testable / falsifiable theory I am not sure. At the moment we can only say which is the most parsimonious view of the facts.



I think that is probably correct, remembering also that conscious fragments are also within consciousness as a whole, or within the all.
What I mean, and have said repeatedly (but people don't seem to that the idea up - so maybe it is rubbish) is that science can't really take on board a theory which can't be falsified by some data and proved to be consistent with other data. As it is, the theory of Idealism seems to be in that category - tell me an observation that would definitely be inconsistent with Idealism!

IMHO, a scientific theory may be correct, but simply come too soon to be in any way useful. If Newton had come up with GR rather than NG, he would (maybe) have been more correct, but nobody back then could have computed anything with the theory - so it would have shrivelled by the wayside.

Thus I think that it would be better if science explores a hypothesis which would be 'less than' Idealism but more explorable. For me Dualism would take the role on Newtonian Gravity in that way of looking at things. Real science does such things, I mean GR and QM are known to be mutually inconsistant, yet both are used routinely.

David
 
Top