Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
jgill
Boulder climber
The high prairie of southern Colorado
|
|
What's the 'way'?
Soul = fiction
Ectoplasm = fiction
IMHO
(Others will furiously disagree!)
;>)
|
|
BASE104
Social climber
An Oil Field
|
|
It is believed that when an atomic bomb explodes, matter is transformed into enormous amounts of energy. This is not true. After the explosion, all of the original matter still exists. All of the protons, electrons, and neutrons making up the uranium, plutonium, or tritium are still within the mushroom cloud. Elements were transformed, neutrons were split into protons and electrons, and protons and electrons combined into neutrons, but in no case was a single particle of matter converted into energy. All of the original components needed to reconstruct the transformed atoms to their initial nuclear states are speeding away in all directions and could, in principle, be reassembled back into the original nuclei. The same exact number of protons and electrons exists after the explosion as existed before. To reassemble these components would require the same amount of kinetic energy that was released in the explosion. The energy of the explosion comes not from converting matter to energy, but from the kinetic energy released when the light elements combine and when very heavy elements break apart. This energy did not just appear from a miraculous transformation of matter into energy, but was always contained within the internal motions of the electrons and protons making up the structure of the fissioning or fusing atoms. The only transformation that occurred was the conversion of rotational kinetic energy into linear kinetic energy.
Oh man. Did you write this, John?
One of the things that bothers me about your needling of Ed, possible only because you hang out with physicists in your carpool, is that you don't attribute it to them. I've seen you do this many times, and I don't trust you one bit. So did you write this? Does your carpool read this thread?
And whoever said that color perception is not related to rods and cones is smoking something. They are central to our visual organs...our eyes. Try seeing anything with to rod or cone cells. They convey information, via the optic nerve, to the visual cortex, which processes the information.
As a test of this, feel free to have your optic nerves severed, and report back.
edit: I see that JL later posted this:
It wasn't "my" description, it came from josh Schoolcraft at JPL.
I rest my case. The defendant admitted his guilt, when he wanted to use it to back up his post. How often do you not admit this, John?
|
|
BASE104
Social climber
An Oil Field
|
|
The "no-thing" idea was not around when you say it was. No-thing refers to phenomenon that do not fit the standard materialist model of an object or thing or form with mass.
Do you know the standard model? Do you really understand mass?
Do you own a calculator?
It pisses me off when Largo plays physicist, as you all can tell. I've taken great care not to attack his notions of nothingness.
He does pilfer from science when it suits him. Measurements particularly, and measurement is one of the foundation of experimental physics.
I just don't see how you can have it both ways.
|
|
PSP also PP
Trad climber
Berkeley
|
|
love gasoline posted"(from Notes on Nagarjuna
by Judy Roitman):"
Judy roitman is a math professor in Kansas and a zen master.
Zen and science do the same thing; make a great effort to observe things for what they are.
The key is why do either? This is truly the key to whether you have a destructive influence on the world or a constructive influence.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
I recently finished reading Prigogine's book The End of Certainty which Largo enjoyed taking the sound bite from that book:
"Prigogine contends that determinism is no longer a viable scientific belief."
to challenge what Largo contends is the consensus view of science.
Interestingly, Prigogine would take Largo's atom bomb phenomenon as a case study in indeterminism, and contend that it would not be possible to "run the clock backward" to reassemble the bomb. The issues of the "arrow of time" were what drove Prigogne to consider the role of dissipative structures in thermodynamic systems in that book.
The book it a quick read, but really doesn't develop the idea very far... interestingly, it can be tied up in the issues of conterfactual definiteness I mentioned above. Prigogine hypothesizes that there are unavoidable dynamical resonance effects that intervene at all stages of a dynamical process, that these effects are ubiquitous in the universe and that the resulting dissipation of the dynamical systems results in a unique direction for time.
In a mathematical sense, he identifies the Hilbert space of all dynamical solutions into time-forward and time-backward spaces, and then goes on to show that the introduction of "Poincaré resonances" in the dynamical process results in the time-foward solutions tending to equilibrium, and the time-backward solutions do not.
He uses the equilibrium criteria to choose the "correct" solution, and so choses the "arrow of time."
It is an interesting argument, and applies to both the quantum mechanical and classical mechanical cases, but perhaps in subtly different ways.
The resulting interpretation is that the affect of these "Poincaré resonances" are essentially random, and as such confound our ability to make definitive predictions, breaking the "deterministic" dogma.
These generalized ideas were pursued in the 1990s. They have applicability to systems at "finite temperature" but how they would apply to "zero temperature" systems was unknown. The results of the studies didn't lead to any blinding insights, that is, they didn't help "explain" more fundamental issues in physics.
One reason was the generalization of formulating the "laws" in more general, functional terms, where what is happening isn't constrained to a particular space-time dimensional framework. So the issue of things like "the arrow of time" are not central to the underlying structure of the universe, dimensions arise from a dynamical process, and can change as those processes change.
Using these sorts of methods to calculate the evolution of the space-time structure of the universe, one such calculations has a two-dimensional structure early in the big-bang evolving to our four-dimensional structure later on. Interestingly, the important assumption is the causality condition, which separates the universe into past-now-present spaces defined by the "light cone" (the definition has to do with the speed-of-light defining how one event could effect another, they must be in each other's "light cone").
In that sense, Prigogine was solving a old problem not now thought to require a solution. One might say he succeeded in framing space-time issues as a result of dynamics. He just choose the wrong dynamics.
One place where Prigogine's work (as taken on by the larger community) does affect our deep thinking is in understanding the Big Bang. In particular, the idea of quantum fluctuations playing a role in the early (and perhaps pre-) universe.
We are lead to pursuing these speculations by trying to understand the distribution of the cosmic background radiation. This radiation "decoupled" from matter once the temperature of the universe dropped below the energy required to ionize hydrogen. Prior to that time, protons-electrons-photons all bounced around off each other, their average kinetic energy (which is the definition of temperature) was high enough so that hydrogen atoms, bound states of protons and electrons, were "dissolved" by photo-ionization, and also electro-ionization.
But once the kinetic energy of all these particles dropped below the ionization energy, the universe became transparent to the photons. The temperature drop is due to the expanding universe...
These photons retain the temperature of that time, but expanded into the current universe's size. And this is observed.
But more interestingly, the very tiny anisotropies of the intensity of this radiation is a measure of the distribution of matter (and dark matter) in the universe at the time of the "recombination" of protons and electrons (although they hadn't previously been combined, or at least not for very long).
It is thought that these anisotropies can be traced back to the quantum fluctuations occurring at the Big Bang, and calculations can be done in simple models to show their traces in the modern measurements of the background radiation. This is because the "inflation" of the universe, the "bang" in the "big bang" happens quickly, before the different parts of the universe can be causally connected...
Oddly, in taking about all these "random" processes, we seem to have a way of understanding the current universe. While we might not be predicting the position of every bit of matter and all the radiation, precisely, we have an accurate depiction of the state of the universe.
One has to try to understand what "determinism" means. It is certainly a useful idea, even to Prigogine, in making his arguments intended to be fatal to the very idea.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
There's nothing confusing except you yourself HFCS.
You are the source of all your own confusion.
It's never outside of your own self.
The self is never confused except when it rebels against it's very own self.
The HFCS's and their foolish clones all are always clueless to their own selves ....
|
|
paul roehl
Boulder climber
california
|
|
Soul = fiction
If you consider the universal notion of soul both culturally and historically, why wouldn't you want to consider exactly why such a belief (in soul) is so ubiquitous? What is it in the construction of the human mind that lends itself to a sense that there is an individual, unique entity within us an entity that is so universally thought of as soul?
If you define soul as simply that fundamental experiencer and mediator of sensory input, the realizer to and for which knowledge serves a purpose, that receiving entity which is you, why does that have to be magic or woo or ectoplasm?
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
These modern material sciensts have no clue what the soul is.
ZERO clue.
All they have is their pure guessing and labels attached to these.
Yet they masquerade their so called knowledge as some kind of authority in the name of their so called science which is pure scientism on the soul.
They then all take insult from this and have a meltdown and start screaming for their materialistic gurus (YouTube) for authority to pacify their meltdowns .....
And right on cue ..... He has meltdown deletes his posts.
Anonymous posters are always like this ...
|
|
jogill
climber
Colorado
|
|
If you consider the universal notion of soul both culturally and historically, why wouldn't you want to consider exactly why such a belief (in soul) is so ubiquitous? What is it in the construction of the human mind that lends itself to a sense that there is an individual, unique entity within us an entity that is so universally thought of as soul?
Earlier, I expressed my opinion: Soul=Personality. The desire to continue to exist in some form and be conscious in that form certainly is universal. However, some versions of post-death existence do in fact avoid "consciousness" and leave the eternal existence of the soul as an abstraction we are unable to comprehend.
Just because such a belief is so ubiquitous does not make that belief true. Mostly it is wishful thinking.
However, if this universal belief is in fact true, I will be pleased when I throw off the mortal coils.
-------------------------
Nice commentary, Ed. Thanks. I'd like to comment, but that stuff is way over my head. I will leave the articulate reply to Largo who is undaunted by difficult physics.
;>)
|
|
Wayno
Big Wall climber
Seattle, WA
|
|
However, if this universal belief is in fact true, I will be pleased when I throw off the mortal coils.
Me too. amen. ;0
I think it was me that brought up Prigogine, hoping that Ed could shed some light on it. I tried to read some of his stuff but it is above my pay grade also, so thanks, Ed.
|
|
jogill
climber
Colorado
|
|
|
Nov 10, 2015 - 11:02am PT
|
Haven't heard from MikeL in some time. Hope he's OK.
|
|
BASE104
Social climber
An Oil Field
|
|
|
Nov 10, 2015 - 11:46am PT
|
If you consider the universal notion of soul both culturally and historically, why wouldn't you want to consider exactly why such a belief (in soul) is so ubiquitous? What is it in the construction of the human mind that lends itself to a sense that there is an individual, unique entity within us an entity that is so universally thought of as soul?
So, first you say that the soul is a physical thing. Next you basically say that since so many believe in it, it is evidence of it being real.
Notions of the soul are ubiquitous among religions. All over the planet, tribal communities came up with an incredible range of beliefs that included a life after death.
The Buddhists in Tibet used to go search for the reincarnation of the Dalai Lama, checking out children. Of course they may have choosed the wrong kid.
The religions that don't believe in reincarnation pretty much all think that after death we will go to a paradise. That paradise is not observable, nor the actual soul.
Remember that guy who weighed dying people in an attempt to determine the weight of the soul? That ended up being wrong. If it is physical, it should have mass, and a change in mass SHOULD be observed leaving the dying person at the moment of death.
The soul, despite attempts, has not been successfully measured. Its reality is based on antique thought.
Why do so many believe in a soul headed to paradise or banished to hell? Because it makes death a little less scary, I believe. Simply blacking out and turning into a rotting corpse is scary. Death is downright scary. Our will to live is programmed into our very beings. No animal wants to be killed.
Anyway, if you believe in a soul headed for paradise, why go to so much trouble fighting life-ending illnesses? It seems to me that a true believer would just take hospice and get this world over with, ASAP. Paradise is awaiting, you know.
That is how they convince the suicide bombers in the Middle East. They are assured of a prime lot in the hereafter.
|
|
paul roehl
Boulder climber
california
|
|
|
Nov 10, 2015 - 12:06pm PT
|
Anyway, if you believe in a soul headed for paradise, why go to so much trouble fighting life-ending illnesses? It seems to me that a true believer would just take hospice and get this world over with, ASAP. Paradise is awaiting, you know.
Wait a minute.
That's not what I said.
I am talking about that element within us that is uniquely us, makes us other and not each other. That thing that is your unique personality separate from others and that receives and judges information.
I never said anything about eternity or paradise... those are your assumptions.
Historically humanity has recognized that element that is within us, that thing that is the unique us. True, some attach an eternal nature to it, but that's not what I was referring to.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Nov 10, 2015 - 12:16pm PT
|
Typical Base104 talking out of his ass again about something he ultimately has zero real clue about.
It's what all clueless people do about anything beyond matter they just puppet someone else bullsh!t who's also clueless.
Stick to matter and forget that which is beyond matter until you spend some years training up your consciousness first ......
|
|
crankster
Trad climber
No. Tahoe
|
|
|
Nov 10, 2015 - 01:27pm PT
|
Nov 10, 2015 - 12:16pm PT
Typical Base104 talking out of his ass again.
Stick to matter and forget that which is beyond matter until you spend some years training up your consciousness first ......
The Forum Bully thinks he can persuade with insults alone.
Flatulence. Non-stop flatulence.
A Mind is a terrible thing to waste.
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
The high prairie of southern Colorado
|
|
|
Nov 10, 2015 - 02:59pm PT
|
That thing that is your unique personality
Yes. The definition that I posted a long time ago.
Very subjective, but probably a mortal feature.
|
|
MH2
Boulder climber
Andy Cairns
|
|
|
Nov 13, 2015 - 12:03am PT
|
Thank you, PSP also PP for letting us know how things went with your father.
J Gill: I post this with reference to images that form behind one's closed eyes when the eyes are rubbed. How many of you have had the experience of "seeing" this sort of thing, intricate and ordered, with the eyes closed?
I have experienced mental imagery that could be described as symmetrical arrays of lines and or circles of light appearing, expanding, and fading into other such patterns.
When we were in South Africa we went to a museum in the city then called Pietersburg (now Polokwane} and saw an exhibit of ancient rock art made by people who used to live in the area. The exhibit compared the patterns of radiating, parallel, or zig-zagging lines to the kind of eyes-closed imagery you mention. They had an explanation for what causes the imagery that I forget. It sounded plausible but not completely convincing. That much I remember.
I also remember that the retina is pressure-sensitive in addition to being light-sensitive. When you tap a closed eye you may see a bit of indistinct brightness. Where patterns would come from I do not know, but the visual system itself is intricate and ordered, including the part where visual memories are stored. When it is activated by a stimulus other than light it should be no surprise if intricate and ordered images appear.
We know that our senses have very low thresholds. They can be activated by stimuli so weak that we don't perceive them consciously with any certainty. I like this old-school science:
In 1962, Eugene Galanter, a psychologist, tested stimuli till people were able to feel them approximately 50% of the time, then used the following as examples of absolute threshold:
Visual – On a clear, dark night a candle can be seen from approximately 30 miles away.
Olfactory – A person can smell a single drop of perfume after it has diffused into 3 rooms.
Auditory – In a silent area, a person can hear a watch tick from approximately 20 feet.
Vestibular – A person is able to tell of a tilt that when on a clock face is seen to be less than half a minute.
Gustatory – A person can taste a single teaspoon of sugar which is diluted in 2 gallons of water.
Tactile – A person can feel a fly's wing dropped from 3 feet above them falling onto their cheek.
Through these conditions, Galanter was able to show that human's sensory organs are often more sensitive than originally thought.
(from Wiki)
I was at one time a student of neuroscience but would not call myself a neuroscientist. I did associate with some excellent neuroscientists and picked up from them ways of thinking about the field.
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
The high prairie of southern Colorado
|
|
|
Nov 13, 2015 - 10:35am PT
|
I wonder if any of the meditators here pass through a phase in their practices where these kinds of images appear?
I think I mentioned some time back a funny experience I had as a kid of eleven or twelve: Feeling like a smart-ass I flipped a baseball bat in the air expecting to catch it, but it hit me in the head instead, and I saw momentarily a blue background with five-pointed white stars - just like you would see in a comic book!
|
|
BASE104
Social climber
An Oil Field
|
|
|
Nov 15, 2015 - 12:15pm PT
|
For millions of years, humans thought that the world was flat.
That didn't make them right, no more than the popular belief in soul has anything to do with reality. Lots of people believe in a soul (the vast majority of humans), but that belief is baseless.
Thanks Werner! I really enjoy it when I get your attention.
I still owe you big time. If not for you, I would have a criminal record. Just a misdemeanor, but a serious one. I think.
For the curious, I walked into the C4 lot one morning, and Werner said, "They are looking for your buddy."
That was enough to give me a heads up, that started one of the best BASE manhunt days in history. He doesn't remember it. He didn't break a law or anything, just let me know that the rangers were after us.
Get this: We hadn't even jumped anything. The previous night was too windy. I assume that they would have said it was conspiracy to commit a misdemeanor or something. No lie, though. Plain clothed rangers were everywhere. I'll tell the whole story some day. It was wild.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!