I did not make a typo, and you do not understand what I said.

Perception is subjective this is true. This is not how I would define an objective reality. How could I?

Here's a simple example to help you: You are taught what the color green is by looking at green things. Your teacher points to various leaves, crayons, construction paper, and other green objects, and says to you, "These are green." You know what green looks like through your eyes, but I can't be certain of what green looks like through your eyes. We still agree that green things are green.

"What green looks like" is a subjective, conscious perception. Green itself is the objective piece of reality.



"4 days old video about what's consciousness and how it is ALL that creates life and reality."

You posted that about a video discussing some basic neuroscience of disorders, and the definition of yourself as it pertains to consciousness and the mind.



For what it's worth, if you're going to claim that quantum physics supports your hypothesis, you better know quantum physics.

This post was edited by Derkaderk on Jan 16 2012 09:45pm

Lose the condescension. I understood everything in that video, but found its conclusions just trivial. Speculative metaphysics is boring. If you were really up to date, you'd know that the current front line is the universe being composed of information and the laws of physics regarding its transfer, not an anthropocentric 'conciousness creates reality' quantum mysticism.
As for my metaphysics, it goes 'objective reality' made out of whatever, be it energy or information or bits in a simulation or conciousness (it doesn't matter to me which), which then through senses is transferred into an internal model in the mind, which is the subjective reality. As long as the objective reality obeys rules, and that there is a reasonable, repeatable correspondence between the objective reality and the subjective internal model (which can simply be tested by comparing the consistency of multiple internal models) then science works and doesn't have to change any of its founding paradigms. Even if we're in the matrix, or the dreams of a hyperdimensional slug, or on a bead of information in a larger universe, it doesn't matter as long as there is internal consistency. This is why speculative metaphysics is boring. The key to solving the 'hard problem' is to do more hard work, rather than investing in a baseless metaphysical hypothesis. Sure he could be right, and if he could prove it, great. But he can't, because he is not a scientist. He is a philosopher and quantum mystic doing thought experiments and misinterpreting a few science blogs. The fact that they all keep talking about young's double slit and einstein's theory of relativity just show that they stopped studying science after high school.

e- I had a look at the start of kymatica, is this just solipsism/'the secret' wrapped up in quantum mysticism? Go do some real philosophy and read some books. This shit seems interesting and mind blowing just like all philosophy does when you first encounter it. Figure out how to be rational and sceptical and then come back and evaluate this evangelism you've been doing. If your brain isn't hurting, you aren't thinking hard enough. This is nothing new or interesting. Plato covered this in his 'cave' analogy. You seem to have got stuck on this idea, and are trapped in your filter bubble. Youtube will reccomend you videos about philosophy of mind and consciousness, you will view them and reaffirm your view, and then post them here. It's no different to going to church, really.

This post was edited by TIMMY213 on Jan 17 2012 02:19am

So far, this guy just sounds like some man that has mentally collapsed..

Its obviously you are not able to understand/feel/agree with this. You mind is blocked and closed.

Because to say that he's not a scientist as an excuse as to why he's wrong is just too much of a joke to me, im sorry. In between many other things you said this was one of the best ones.

Reading your posts (almost everyone that replied to my threads), I can travel back in time at least a good 1000 years, believe me ^^ that's why from now on I won't reply to anyone any further just like I was doing at first.

But just to let you know google: "what are quantum physicists studying right now" and tell me the results you found.

See disagreeing with this you are entirely alone disagreeing with quantum physicists and companies that study quantum and invest millions of dollars in research. But yea you are right and they are wrong.

Also "read more books"? Oh god that is so anecdotal.

As i said its like teaching pigs to speak English ;p Almost impossible.

That information you said is the same thing as consciousness, its how it "works", see there's many theories and ways to put it out but they but all lead to the same, consciousness. I will create a unified thread with different ways to call/understand/define consciousness. Even spiritualists have their own ways, one of them is transcendental meditation, which many famous people do including Howard stern for example.

Oh and by the way, you do know that quantum physics is the base of all science right? If you disagree with quantum physics as a matter of fact better just not study anything else cause you will never get it right. Better just not have an opinion about it and totally ignore it as many do.

This post was edited by omghacks2 on Jan 17 2012 01:22pm

Why? Why should I believe you? Why would I believe anyone who makes that claim? Do it and bring me a relic.

I already told you we understand the idea. We just reject it. It's not difficult to grasp.

Not yet it's not. So far, quantum physics can't be extrapolated to explain macroscopic events. Why do you even talk about quantum physics? You already explained that you have no background in the subject. You explained that your credentials are your experiences; in other words, you explained that you have no credentials.

Again I pose the question for the third time: Do you believe life has always existed? Because I can promise you that the majority of physicists will argue that life is a relatively recent phenomenon in this universe. Life is a temporary phenomenon in this universe, and when life stops existing, you have no conscious observers. Your entire hypothesis only functions in a fractional window of time in the grand scheme of the universe. Look up the Five Ages of the Universe. Look up the Heat Death of the universe.

This post was edited by Derkaderk on Jan 17 2012 01:58pm

Life does not exist only as you are calling it. Life is a form and shape of consciousness as many others. You are eternal because you are part of that consciousness which is what creates everything you see now.

Life as you define it may stop existing or not but it doesn't affect anything at all, the observer is not your body, the observer is you as consciousness, and that will never cease to exist, only transform in different forms of existence. Nothing in the universe dissapears.


Edit: one very important thing to understand this and how it's an amazing source of power for anyone is, you have to step out of scientific thinking where everything is based on 1+1=2. Quantum physics is only one way to express/explain it.

This post was edited by omghacks2 on Jan 17 2012 02:23pm

so what is the name of your cult?

I never said he was wrong because he's not a scientist. I agreed with him on most of the first half, as a philosopher. But he cannot properly justify it because he lacks knowledge of quantum physics beyond a high school level, and so do you.

Read more books because to write a book requires more effort and thought than throwing together a youtube video, more releavant information can be gleaned from 10 minutes of reading vs a 10 minute youtube video, books aren't subject to filter bubbles, and when you read you are more likely to critically examine the content you're putting into your brain, rather than believing what you're told. If you lost the condescending attitude, I might've even recommended you some that explore the same issues as you seem enamoured with (conciousness, extended mind, singularity), that don't rely on quantum mysticism.

To make this perfectly clear: I reject quantum mysticism. What you are evangelising is NOT quantum physics. It is a mystical interpretation of high school quantum physics and is complete and utter rubbish. If you genuinely believe you can travel back in time 1000 years then you've lost it.

I am not closed minded, if I were closed minded I never would have replied. I thought that something spammed across the science forum might have a chance of being interesting. I am, however, not so open minded as to let my brain fall out, as you have done. I critically examined what you posted and found the conclusions lacking. I reject this in favour of more justified worldviews.

thx for the share mate

How could you possibly know that?