Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
MH2
Boulder climber
Andy Cairns
|
|
|
Jun 18, 2015 - 05:33pm PT
|
There are as many realities as there are people in the world
I am not far from STEEVEE on this. I would say that reality includes but is not limited to all that is going on in all the minds on the planet. That part of reality would be hard for us to know.
|
|
cintune
climber
The Utility Muffin Research Kitchen
|
|
|
Jun 18, 2015 - 05:51pm PT
|
And even more important, when you detach from the articles of observations - the people, places, things and phenomenon - then what is the experience of observing, that is, observing witout an object.
Simple unfocused awareness.
Largo's unrelenting enthusiasm is starting to remind me of the adage that "every generation thinks it invented sex."
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
The high prairie of southern Colorado
|
|
|
Jun 18, 2015 - 06:15pm PT
|
Not remotely so. That is why you are warned not to try and do the experiential adventures alone, but rather in a group. Each discipline has many ways to evaluate and test and deepen the process, but what I suspect you are looking for is confirmation about content, rather than deepening your understanding of sentience (JL)
OK, sounds reasonable. It's when you postulate that this internal awareness involves an internal reality that coincides with external reality in some way that you lose me (and probably others). When you make this assertion you automatically trigger the necessity of scientific processes whether you desire to do so or not.
Just don't make this assertion and you're fine. Call it your speculation. Just because generations of Zen practitioners have concluded what you might be suggesting proves nothing, other than the power of group-think. There are a lot of Muslim men who expect those virgins upon flying off to paradise. And a lot of Christians who are certain they will have eternal life. And they may be right . . . but these are beliefs, not proven facts.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Jun 18, 2015 - 06:47pm PT
|
When you make this assertion you automatically trigger the necessity of scientific processes
It should be defacto standard procedure.
But the modern scientists must use the proper method.
Not fixed up in using only defective machines and instruments you create.
One must search for the perfect tool and instrument.
It is always there.
If one says there's no such thing then you're a fool who drowns in the ocean of nescience ......
|
|
BLUEBLOCR
Social climber
joshua tree
|
|
|
Jun 18, 2015 - 07:10pm PT
|
Is there a neural network that experiences raw awareness?
To the Math and science guys. This is purely imagination.
I'm looking for absolute ZERO in the universe. .... -3, -2, -1, O,<(maybe here?) 1, 2, 3,...
Not sure which pond to fish in so here's a stupid example; I'm driving a car down the street(forward motion), suddenly I need to back up, so I stop. With my foot on the brake and in neutral my car has the "potential energy" to go either direction.
I'm wondering if in the natural sciences or math is there somewhere, where a line of motion, or an algorithm stops and changes direction?
Maybe in the Sun's rays, or Mitochondria ?
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Jun 18, 2015 - 07:32pm PT
|
Largo, you avoided the question, again:
To the extent that I have no idea what goes on in you to give you the appearance of consciousness, and vis-versa, we somehow can come to an agreement that we both do exhibit the property of having consciousness.
How do we come to that agreement?
|
|
BLUEBLOCR
Social climber
joshua tree
|
|
|
Jun 18, 2015 - 08:43pm PT
|
It's interesting that Life (plants and animals) need to sleep.
At the time of sleep, consciousness/awareness is neither alive or dead.
Could sleep be considered as being Zero? Dreams being -1, ?
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Jun 18, 2015 - 09:33pm PT
|
Consciousness is eternally life itself.
There's no question of alive, dead, sleep or zero as consciousness pervades all those ...
|
|
BLUEBLOCR
Social climber
joshua tree
|
|
|
Jun 18, 2015 - 09:45pm PT
|
OK. Do you think my car in neutral exhibits "raw-awareness"?
Speaking metaphorically from the quantum level ofcourse.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Jun 18, 2015 - 09:50pm PT
|
OK. Do you think my car in neutral exhibits "raw-awareness"?
do you?
I think you'll answer to the negative... but provide a reason. How do you know your car does or does not exhibit "raw-awareness"
|
|
BLUEBLOCR
Social climber
joshua tree
|
|
|
Jun 18, 2015 - 10:02pm PT
|
There is no nothing,
Ok then if I have a total of $100., then I give you $100. how much do I now have
If there is NO wind. What is the wind speed?
Have you been out in the ocean when it changed tides? I have. In some places one can absolutely feel it. There must be a certain point between the outgoing tide changes to ingoing?
|
|
BLUEBLOCR
Social climber
joshua tree
|
|
|
Jun 18, 2015 - 10:06pm PT
|
but provide a reason
So not an awareness. But a potential for either- or. Raw?
Edit: I know prolly physics 101 right
|
|
BLUEBLOCR
Social climber
joshua tree
|
|
|
Jun 18, 2015 - 10:22pm PT
|
Wiki ,
A photon is massless,[Note 3] has no electric charge,[11] and is stable. A photon has two possible polarization states. In the momentum representation, which is preferred in quantum field theory, a photon is described by its wave vector, which determines its wavelength λ and its direction of propagation. A photon's wave vector may not be zero and can be represented either as a spatial 3-vector or as a (relativistic) four-vector; in the latter case it belongs to the light cone (pictured). Different signs of the four-vector denote different circular polarizations, but in the 3-vector representation one should account for the polarization state separately; it actually is a spin quantum number. In both cases the space of possible wave vectors is three-dimensional.
I couldn't get the image to copy : (
But at the center of this 3 demensional space why isn't it O?
Ok so I am trying to fit raw awareness at the center of this three dimensional ZERO with a potential for infinity. Depending on polarization could be infinity x 2 ?
|
|
jstan
climber
|
|
|
Jun 18, 2015 - 10:54pm PT
|
Blu:
From reading your posts I think you may be confusing zero and nothing.
Zero: From a ling titled "The History of Zero:
The renowned mathematicians among the Ancient Greeks, who learned the fundamentals of their math from the Egyptians, did not have a name for zero, nor did their system feature a placeholder as did the Babylonian. They may have pondered it, but there is no conclusive evidence to say the symbol even existed in their language. It was the Indians who began to understand zero both as a symbol and as an idea.
Brahmagupta, around 650 AD, was the first to formalize arithmetic operations using zero. He used dots underneath numbers to indicate a zero. These dots were alternately referred to as 'sunya', which means empty, or 'kha', which means place. Brahmagupta wrote standard rules for reaching zero through addition and subtraction as well as the results of operations with zero. The only error in his rules was division by zero, which would have to wait for Isaac Newton and G.W. Leibniz to tackle. .......
I would suggest you research this mathematical concept and understand it more comprehensively.
Nothing:
I think the nothing in your mind concerns at least partially a state existing in the natural world. QM has entirely changed our understanding of this state. One concept of nothing existing today is that if you wait long enough nothing will turn into something. Actually that is a short handed statement perhaps better expressed as: if you expect nothing to turn into something that lasts more than 10^-43 seconds you will have to wait a long time. Furthermore time is now something that responds dynamically to the state of the natural world. It is not an imaginary timepiece you hold in your hand unaffected by anything.
|
|
BLUEBLOCR
Social climber
joshua tree
|
|
|
Jun 18, 2015 - 11:16pm PT
|
It is not an imaginary timepiece you hold in your hand unaffected by anything.
Enlightening line :)
Your right, my imagination confused the facts. Thanks.
Charlie Rose's "Brain Series" is on KVCR now, gotta go.
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
|
Jun 19, 2015 - 06:34am PT
|
re: the hard problem
So here's a much better edit of the Steven Pinker Robert Wright exchange regarding sentience, its "maddening" mysterious nature and our possible human cognitive constraints on ever figuring it out...
[Click to View YouTube Video]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rYYzPPsUxDQ
Is it sentience that gives life meaning?
Isn't sentience a sign that there is something more to existence than imagined in science's very mechanistic view of life?
Is mind, like eyes and limbs, a product of natural selection?
Insofar as you accept (believe in) evolution, are you a type 1 evolutionist (accepting mind and feelings as a product of natural selection) or a type 2 evolutionist (rejecting mind and feelings as a product of natural selection)?
It is sentience that gives us joy? No sentience, no joy? No joy, no human nature in its fullness - that fullness we see and experience? Could insentient beings get it on as we do? Isn't that a clue, a hint, to its raison d'être (e.g., as a product of natural selection)?
It's... maddening!
|
|
STEEVEE
Social climber
HUMBOLDT, CA
|
|
|
Jun 19, 2015 - 10:05am PT
|
I think the nothing in your mind concerns at least partially a state existing in the natural world. QM has entirely changed our understanding of this state. One concept of nothing existing today is that if you wait long enough nothing will turn into something. Actually that is a short handed statement perhaps better expressed as: if you expect nothing to turn into something that lasts more than 10^-43 seconds you will have to wait a long time. Furthermore time is now something that responds dynamically to the state of the natural world. It is not an imaginary timepiece you hold in your hand unaffected by anything.
So, without an observer there's nothing. This, I know, has been discussed before as it is a tenet of QM and it always fascinates me. We (humans and any other conscious being)and the universe exist as a pair. You can't have one without the other. The universe cannot exist without consciousness.
As for the car with "raw awareness"...well it would have none without us. We built it, possible drove it, maybe washed it and without us it would be nothing. If we could set up an experiment that measured "raw awareness" in a car, then the results are only as valid as the experiment and the observer. It's a solipsistic reality when one tries to pick it all apart and measure.
The problem exist in our mind, but the consciousness reveals the truth.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Jun 19, 2015 - 10:41am PT
|
I'm not asking to provide a scientific analysis of why something has consciousness...
I'm just asking anyone here, how do you know that I have consciousness and that the car does not.
|
|
Ward Trotter
Trad climber
|
|
|
Jun 19, 2015 - 10:59am PT
|
I'm just asking anyone here, how do you know that I have consciousness and that the car does not.
Because you are a human being like myself and I am conscious.
(That's my short answer)
|
|
STEEVEE
Social climber
HUMBOLDT, CA
|
|
|
Jun 19, 2015 - 11:14am PT
|
I'm just asking anyone here, how do you know that I have consciousness and that the car does not. If I hit you on your big toe with a hammer and ask you if it hurts, I believe you and I will conclude that you're conscious...especially after you punch me in the face. The same can't be said of the car if I were to hit it with a hammer. But this is a crude experiment and only measures for human consciousness. I wouldn't know how to measure for consciousness in a automobile. That would be something a lunatic would do.
DMT, you are correct that my statement cannot be proved, nor can it be proved wrong. If all consciousness was wiped from the universe, then there would be nothing to prove me wrong ;)
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!