|
Post by Admin on Jun 14, 2020 1:49:56 GMT
"Scientists have long been trying to understand human consciousness – the subjective “stuff” of thoughts and sensations inside our minds. There used to be an assumption that consciousness is produced by our brains, and that in order to understand it, we just need to figure out how the brain works. But this assumption raises questions. Apart from the fact that decades of research and theorising have not shed any significant light on the issue, there are some strange mismatches between consciousness and brain activity. Spiritual science: how a new perspective on consciousness could help us understand ourselves June 6, 2019 1.47pm BST theconversation.com/spiritual-science-how-a-new-perspective-on-consciousness-could-help-us-understand-ourselves-116451
|
|
|
Post by naominash3 on Jun 25, 2020 10:02:51 GMT
"Scientists have long been trying to understand human consciousness – the subjective “stuff” of thoughts and sensations inside our minds. There used to be an assumption that consciousness is produced by our brains, and that in order to understand it, we just need to figure out how the brain works. But this assumption raises questions. Apart from the fact that decades of research and theorising have not shed any significant light on the issue, there are some strange mismatches between consciousness and brain activity. Spiritual science: how a new perspective on consciousness could help us understand ourselves June 6, 2019 1.47pm BST theconversation.com/spiritual-science-how-a-new-perspective-on-consciousness-could-help-us-understand-ourselves-116451I think the author, Steve Taylor, did a great job of highlighting the dilemma between the traditional scientific denial of the soul and the obvious human-eye experience that demands that there are souls. I have trouble seeing why people don't think we have souls, but only because I have limited experience with the most evil among us. The problem is that if we don't have souls, why is there any reason to research anything that will keep us alive and well? I mean, we stink up the planet and hijack it's resources. So without souls, itd be better to limit the population and control genetics and on and on and on. I feel like Mary Shelley hit the nail on the head when she wrote Frankenstein' s Monster. Frankenstein, in his effort to create life, missed obvious clues as to why that would be a problem he could not handle.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jun 25, 2020 18:51:34 GMT
Electrons May Very Well Be Conscious nautil.us/blog/electrons-may-very-well-be-consciousThis month, the cover of New Scientist ran the headline, “Is the Universe Conscious?” Mathematician and physicist Johannes Kleiner, at the Munich Center for Mathematical Philosophy in Germany, told author Michael Brooks that a mathematically precise definition of consciousness could mean that the cosmos is suffused with subjective experience. “This could be the beginning of a scientific revolution,” Kleiner said, referring to research he and others have been conducting. Kleiner and his colleagues are focused on the Integrated Information Theory of consciousness, one of the more prominent theories of consciousness today. As Kleiner notes, IIT (as the theory is known) is thoroughly panpsychist because all integrated information has at least one bit of consciousness. You might see the rise of panpsychism as part of a Copernican trend—the idea that we’re not special. The Earth is not the center of the universe. Humans are not a treasured creation, or even the pinnacle of evolution. So why should we think that creatures with brains, like us, are the sole bearers of consciousness? In fact, panpsychism has been around for thousands of years as one of various solutions to the mind-body problem. David Skrbina’s 2007 book, Panpsychism in the West, provides an excellent history of this intellectual tradition. Electrons may have some type of extremely rudimentary mind. While there are many versions of panpsychism, the version I find appealing is known as constitutive panpsychism. It states, to put it simply, that all matter has some associated mind or consciousness, and vice versa. Where there is mind there is matter and where there is matter there is mind. They go together. As modern panpsychists like Alfred North Whitehead, David Ray Griffin, Galen Strawson, and others have argued, all matter has some capacity for feeling, albeit highly rudimentary feeling in most configurations of matter. Panpsychists look at the many rungs on the complexity ladder of nature and see no obvious line between mind and no-mind. Philosopher Thomas Nagel famously asked in 1974 what is it like to be a bat, to echolocate and fly? We can’t know with any certainty, but we can reasonably infer, based on observation of their complex behaviors and the close genetic kinship between all mammals and humans—and the fact that evolution proceeds incrementally—that bats have a rich inner life. By the same logic, we can look steadily at less-complex forms of behavior that allow us to reasonably infer some kind of mind associated with all types of matter. Yes, including even the lowly electron. While inanimate matter doesn’t evolve like animate matter, inanimate matter does behave. It does things. It responds to forces. Electrons move in certain ways that differ under different experimental conditions. These types of behaviors have prompted respected physicists to suggest that electrons may have some type of extremely rudimentary mind. For example the late Freeman Dyson, the well-known American physicist, stated in his 1979 book, Disturbing the Universe, that “the processes of human consciousness differ only in degree but not in kind from the processes of choice between quantum states which we call ‘chance’ when made by electrons.” Quantum chance is better framed as quantum choice—choice, not chance, at every level of nature. David Bohm, another well-known American physicist, argued similarly: “The ability of form to be active is the most characteristic feature of mind, and we have something that is mind-like already with the electron.” Many biologists and philosophers have recognized that there is no hard line between animate and inanimate. J.B.S. Haldane, the eminent British biologist, supported the view that there is no clear demarcation line between what is alive and what is not: “We do not find obvious evidence of life or mind in so-called inert matter…; but if the scientific point of view is correct, we shall ultimately find them, at least in rudimentary form, all through the universe.” Niels Bohr, the Danish physicist who was seminal in developing quantum theory, stated that the “very definitions of life and mechanics … are ultimately a matter of convenience…. [T]he question of a limitation of physics in biology would lose any meaning if, instead of distinguishing between living organisms and inanimate bodies, we extended the idea of life to all natural phenomena.” More recently, University of Colorado astrobiologist Bruce Jakosky, who has worked with NASA in the search for extraterrestrial life, asked rhetorically: “Was there a distinct moment when Earth went from having no life to having life, as if a switch were flipped? The answer is ‘probably not.’” Theoretical physicist Sabine Hossenfelder, author of the 2018 book Lost in Math, has taken a contrary position. “ f you want a particle to be conscious, your minimum expectation should be that the particle can change,” she argued in a post titled “Electrons Don’t Think.” “It’s hard to have an inner life with only one thought. But if electrons could have thoughts, we’d long have seen this in particle collisions because it would change the number of particles produced in collisions.”
Yet “change” means many different things, including position in space over time. What Dyson is getting at in his remark about electrons and quantum theory is that the probabilistic distribution-outcomes of quantum experiments (like the double-slit experiment) are better explained as the product, not of pure chance (another way of saying “we don’t know”), but of numerous highly rudimentary choices by each electron in each moment about where and how to manifest.
Whitehead’s variety of panpsychism, still the most worked-out version of panpsychism today, re-envisions the nature of matter in a fundamental way. For Whitehead, all actual entities, including electrons, atoms, and molecules, are “drops of experience” in that they enjoy at least a little bit of experience, a little bit of awareness. At first blush it’s a strange perspective but eventually makes a great deal of sense.
Rather than being unchanging things moving around in a container of space-time—the modern view in a nutshell—Whitehead conceives of particles like electrons as a chain of successive iterations of a single electron that bear a strong likeness to each other in each iteration, but are not identical to each other. Each iteration is a little different than the last. There is no static and unchanging electron. The degree to which each iteration is more or less different than the last iteration is the place for an iota of choice, and mind. This iota of choice compounds upwards and, through the course of biological evolution, results in the complex types of mind and choice that we humans and other mammals enjoy.
Whitehead, a mathematical philosopher, fleshed out in detail this process of “concrescence,” the oscillating nature of entities like electrons moment to moment, in his philosophical works Science and the Modern World, Process and Reality, and Modes of Thought. These are sometimes difficult works but are well worth the struggle to get through if you’re interested in basing physics on a more empirical metaphysical foundation.
Many modern thinkers have come to embrace Whitehead and panpsychism to varying degrees, including Bohm, whose Wholeness and the Implicate Order, his magnum opus on modern physics and the nature of reality, refers to Whitehead as an inspiration.
I am fleshing out in my work how we can turn these “merely” philosophical considerations about the nature of mind throughout nature into a testable set of experiments, with some early thoughts sketched here. Such experiments move debates about panpsychism out of the realm of philosophy and more firmly into the realm of science.
So, yes, there is plenty of room in modern physics for electrons to “think.”
Tam Hunt is a scholar and writer affiliated with the University of California, Santa Barbara. He is the author of the book Eco, Ego, Eros, that explores panpsychism across various fields, and of the General Resonance Theory of consciousness, which is panpsychist in orientation. He blogs at medium.com.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jun 28, 2020 11:12:48 GMT
EMQM17 – TOWARDS ONTOLOGY OF QUANTUM MECHANICS AND THE CONSCIOUS AGENT 26/10 – 28/10/2017, University of London, Senate House, Beveridge Hall www.fetzer-franklin-fund.org/events/emqm17/On the occasion of David Bohm’s 100th birthday, the EmQM17 Symposium offered an open forum for critically evaluating the prospects and significance – for 21st century physics – of ontological quantum mechanics, an approach which David Bohm helped pioneer. Contributions were invited that presented current advances in both standard as well as realist approaches to quantum mechanics, including new experiments, work in quantum foundations, and quantum philosophy.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jun 30, 2020 15:26:06 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 5, 2020 15:55:15 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 7, 2020 14:07:28 GMT
An Elegant Big Theory of Everything: My Big TOE by Tom Campbell www.youtube.com/watch?v=zstsJ7-ULM0Science is on it's way to accepting a virtual reality model. My Big TOE concludes that we are living in a virtual reality. It is an inclusive theory. No one and nothing is left out. It is simple and elegant because it contains only two assumptions. Our physical reality is a sub-set of something more fundamental. Consciousness. Early twentieth century physicists knew this, but had nowhere to go with it at that time. At that time, you were either a physicist, or a mystic (consciousness explorer). To reach Einstein's goal to find a unified theory, a uniquely qualified individual would be needed. One with a career in both physics and consciousness. That individual is Thomas W Campbell. For those new to MBT and also for those who have found value in his theory for many years, this synopsis of Tom's big theory of everything will establish why his theory is our best model of reality to date.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 13, 2020 16:05:02 GMT
In this path-breaking book, ten founding members of the Academy for the Advancement of Postmaterialist Sciences (www.AAPSglobal.com) explain how they came to the provocative conclusion that consciousness is a fundamental property of the universe that exists apart from the physical brain, and that consciousness plays a central role in the existence and evolution of the physical world. -Dr. Gary Schwartz -Dr. Marjorie Woollcott www.aapsglobal.com/opensciences.org/blogs/open-sciences-blog/introducing-the-academy-for-the-advancement-of-postmaterialist-sciencesIs Consciousness Primary?: Perspectives from the Founding Members of the Academy for the Advancement of Postmaterialist Sciences (Advances in Postmaterialist ... of Postmaterialist Sciences Book 1) by Gary Schwartz (Author), Marjorie Woollacott (Author) "In this path-breaking book, ten founding members of the Academy for the Advancement of Postmaterialist Sciences (www.AAPSglobal.com) explain how they came to the provocative conclusion that consciousness is a fundamental property of the universe that exists apart from the physical brain, and that consciousness plays a central role in the existence and evolution of the physical world. These scientists and physicians share examples from their personal lives and scientific careers about how they became postmaterialist thinkers and researchers. Experiments and data are mixed with direct personal experiences and clinical cases to illustrate the breadth and depth of this emerging expansion (some would say revolution) in science and society. Some of the ideas and evidence present in this book are inherently controversial, especially to conventional science, although in agreement with the majority interpretation of quantum physics. At the same time, they are visionary and inspirational. Scientists and lay-persons alike can enjoy the perspectives and predictions expressed in this first volume of the Academy’s Advances in Postmaterialist Sciences series. Marjorie Woollacott, Ph.D., is an Emeritus Professor of Human Physiology, past chair of the Dept. of Human Physiology, and a member of the Institute of Neuroscience at the U. of Oregon. In addition to teaching courses on neuroscience and rehabilitation, she taught courses on complementary and alternative medicine and meditation. She has published over 200 papers and received over $7.2 million in research funding from the National Institutes of Health and other research agencies.Gary E. Schwartz, Ph.D., is Professor of Psychology, Medicine, Neurology, Psychiatry, and Surgery at the University of Arizona. In addition to teaching courses on health and spiritual psychology, he is the Director of the Laboratory for Advances in Consciousness and Health. A Fellow of the American Psychological Association, and the Academy for Behavioral Medicine Research. He has published more than 450 scientific papers and has received over $20 million in grant funding." Quote from Amazon.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 14, 2020 18:29:20 GMT
TEDx Brussels 2010 - Stuart Hameroff - Do we have a quantum Soul? www.youtube.com/watch?v=iIyEjh6ef_8Dr. Hameroff's research for 35 years has involved consciousness - how the pinkish gray meat between our ears produces the richness of experiential awareness. A clinical anesthesiologist, Hameroff has studied how anesthetic gas molecules selectively erase consciousness via delicate quantum effects on protein dynamics. Following a longstanding interest in the computational capacity of microtubules inside neurons, Hameroff teamed with the eminent British physicist Sir Roger Penrose to develop a controversial quantum theory of consciousness called orchestrated objective reduction (Orch OR) which connects brain processes to fundamental spacetime geometry. Recently Hameroff has explored the theoretical implications of Orch OR for consciousness to exist independent of the body, distributed in deeper, lower, faster scales in non-local, holographic spacetime, raising possible scientific approaches to the soul and spirituality. @tedxbrussels 2010
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 17, 2020 21:00:11 GMT
Looking for an inspiring summer read? In this article Dr. Antonin Tuynman presents to the reading audience Theology of Digital Physics by Alex M. Vikoulov. Since we live in a world which isn't random, but organized at every level, a role for consciousness seems unavoidable. ‘Digital theology’ shows us compelling evidence from quantum mechanics, mathematics and computer sciences, which not only aligns with a philosophical worldview of the Primacy of Consciousness, but which also assigns a role to information as its modus operandi. #consciousness #phenomenonology #transcendence #pantheism #theology www.ecstadelic.net/top-stories/phenomenal-consciousness-the-cosmic-self-and-the-pantheistic-interpretation-of-our-holographic-reality
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 21, 2020 17:43:15 GMT
Arthur Schopenhauer: The West’s Nondual Sage By Bernardo Kastrup NONDUALITY www.scienceandnonduality.com/article/arthur-schopenhauer-the-wests-nondual-sage“The emptiness of existence (…) finds its expression (…) in the flitting present as the only manner of real existence; in the dependence and relativity of all things; in constantly becoming without being” “Of every event in our life it is only for a moment that we can say that it is; after that we must say forever that it was. (…) It would probably make us angry to see this short space of time slipping away, if we were not secretly conscious in the furthest depths of our being that the spring of eternity belongs to us” “With the disappearance of willing from consciousness, the individuality is really abolished also, and with it its suffering and sorrow. I have therefore described the pure subject of knowing, which then remains over as the eternal world-eye. This eye looks out from all living beings (…) It is thus identical with itself, constantly one and the same” You would be forgiven to think that the passages quoted above are by some eastern nonduality sage, the fruits of a lifetime of meditation and letting go of the ego. But they have, in fact, been written by one of western philosophy’s greatest exponents, Arthur Schopenhauer, in the first half of the 19th century. Indeed, Schopenhauer’s profound insights—echoing eastern nonduality as they undeniably do—can be placed squarely in the western philosophical tradition, with roots in naturphilosophie, German idealism and a direct link to Immanuel Kant’s west-defining work. As the West eagerly explores Advaita Vedanta, Kashmiri Shaivism, Yogācāra Buddhism and a number of other eastern traditions, the West’s own native philosophy of nonduality remains largely undiscovered. Decades of systematic misunderstanding and grievous misrepresentation by academics certainly haven’t helped. For instance, Schopenhauer’s metaphysics has been described by Prof. Christopher Janaway—perhaps the most recognizable Schopenhaurian scholar alive today—variously as “fanciful,” “ridiculous,” “embarrassing” and even “barbaric;” something “so obviously flawed that some people have doubted whether he [Schopenhauer] really means it.” How could any philosophy achieve its deserved renown under such sweeping and crass mischaracterization? Upon failing to understand Schopenhauer, Janaway concludes that it is the former—not Janaway himself—that “seems to stumble into a quite elementary difficulty.” Such an attitude is rather typical of western academic hubris towards ideas that don’t fit its expressly dualist subject-object paradigm. For this reason, Schopenhauer is best known today for—of all things—his ostensive pessimism and misogyny. Yet, however true both charges may be, they do not change the fact that Schopenhauer’s introspective insights are one of the greatest intellectual and spiritual achievements in the history of the West; a treasure buried in our backyard, which we have tragically been largely oblivious to for over two centuries. But now we have a new opportunity to rediscover what is ours, for the benign influence of eastern nonduality in the West may have opened the space and created the receptiveness necessary for the recognition of Schopenhauer’s message; it may have finally given us the tools—the language—to fathom and appreciate a line of reasoning and insight that has eluded presumed experts for decades. For the sake of the West’s own sanity, we must grab this opportunity and reconnect with our own roots, recover our own western spiritual identity. Indeed, Schopenhauer conveys his ideas not through Kōans or meditation exercises, but a kind of logical reasoning—this most archetypically western of all things—so hypnotic in its pace, coherent in its approach and persuasive in its conclusions that, remarkably, similar results can be achieved. Reading Schopenhauer is a kind of meditation, but one that leverages the West’s own inherent dispositions, strengths, style, language, references and metaphors. His metaphysics reflects the wisdom of our own heritage.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 27, 2020 13:34:32 GMT
Looking for an inspirational summer read? In this article Dr. Antonin Tuynman presents to the reading audience Theology of Digital Physics by Alex M. Vikoulov. Since we live in a world which isn't random, but organized at every level, a role for consciousness seems unavoidable. ‘Digital theology’ shows us compelling evidence from quantum mechanics, mathematics and computer sciences, which not only aligns with a philosophical worldview of the Primacy of Consciousness, but which also assigns a role to information as its modus operandi. #DigitalPhysics #DigitalTheology #UniversalMind #consciousness #phenomenonology #transcendence #pantheism #theology www.ecstadelic.net/top-stories/phenomenal-consciousness-the-cosmic-self-and-the-pantheistic-interpretation-of-our-holographic-reality
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 27, 2020 23:31:41 GMT
Consciousness cannot be accounted for in physical terms. For consciousness is absolutely fundamental. It cannot be accounted for in terms of anything else.
– Erwin Schrodinger.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Aug 2, 2020 9:59:57 GMT
One of the key postulations of the paper The Unified Spacememory Network, by Nassim Haramein et al., is that the intelligence and seeming orchestrated behavior underlying the self-organizing dynamics of matter and energy in the universe is based in a fundamental informational structure of spacetime, the Planck field. Since there is information processing activity occurring down to the smallest scale with Planck qubits, which we postulate cannot only process information but store memory, there are the basic components of a proto-conscious intelligence field present in the very fabric of spacetime—what we refer to as spacememory. The scientific model in which consciousness is present in all domains of the universe and underlies all phenomena is known as panpsychism. Panpsychism as an Observational Science Faculty Article Feb 06, 2019 www.resonancescience.org/blog/Panpsychism-as-an-Observational-Science
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Aug 16, 2020 13:29:46 GMT
|
|