Re: Nothing by Nobody Nowhere (No Where = Now Here)
Quote:
Originally Posted by N0B0DY
What I don`t concede to, however, is your need to finagle a process of detection to render it different than a process of observation because both are based synonymously upon the differentials of probability distributions. Whether the brain differentiates or the detector, the empirical result is the same. So I feel it justifiable to infer that the sole factor in determining this time-dependent, observably-particulate reality is observation.
"finagle" act or obtain dishonestly (Concise Oxford Dictionary). Shame on you, Nobody, to heap abuse upon an honest cat like me.
However, I maintain that 'detection' and 'observation' are completely different and our objective understanding of reality is held back by the need for explanations which require conciousness.
Re: Nothing by Nobody Nowhere (No Where = Now Here)
I don't know why you would focus on that little part of the response, Felix, but it wasn't meant as an insult. Just as a manipulation of definitions to argue a point that has been implied by top physicists.
Essentially, the process is moot (debatable), but the result is important in bridging the gap between GR and QM.
Re: Nothing by Nobody Nowhere (No Where = Now Here)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fluent Piffle
The Brain has evolved in 'halves' so that it can not only ask questions, but answer them as well. This is wave-motion between to apparently 'opposing 'sides', but the organism works as a Unity to discover more about itself and surroundings.
Re: Nothing by Nobody Nowhere (No Where = Now Here)
Quote:
Originally Posted by N0B0DY
I don't know why you would focus on that little part of the response, Felix, but it wasn't meant as an insult. Just as a manipulation of definitions to argue a point that has been implied by top physicists. Essentially, the process is moot (debatable), but the result is important in bridging the gap between GR and QM.
No offence taken, Nobody, just asserting myself.
I chose that part of the response because: (1) I see it as fundamental in bridging the gap between GR and QM and (2) the current difficulties, experienced by 'top physicists' are (largely) caused by their apparent (but falacious) need to include conciousness in order to describe reality.
Re: Nothing by Nobody Nowhere (No Where = Now Here)
Quote:
Originally Posted by N0B0DY
How else can one discern and/or explain any sense of reality without conscious detection or observation, Felix?
Consciousness is the thing that makes us aware of reality but more than that it enables us to analyse it. But I don't believe that it is required (as in an observer being present) in order to bring about the collapse of a particle's wave function.
Re: Nothing by Nobody Nowhere (No Where = Now Here)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Felix Schrodinger
Consciousness is the thing that makes us aware of reality but more than that it enables us to analyse it. But I don't believe that it is required (as in an observer being present) in order to bring about the collapse of a particle's wave function.
If we're going to define consciousness as a thing resulting from an a priori reality that would make sense, but as an apriori subprocess that governs all variable a posteriori phenomena, I correlate the wave to subconsciousness and its variable narrowing down to consciousness. I think in this way it is more scientific because we are basing observable reality on conscious observations and therefore any substrate reality would naturally be based on a sublevel of that process.
The merge of GR and QM would then be based on incorporating an infinite number of infinitesimal bosonic particles following the same laws as those observed macroscopically. The atomic spheres are the result of aged light as it propagates as time throughout an infinite number of scales. Just as is the case of galaxies that become more spherical as they age. Further evidence of this might be the fractal shapes that require strict laws to be carried throughout infinite scales with the strange attractors as the basis for observable mutations and evolution.
Reverting to the "particles being everywhere," if we consider an infinite composite particle or wave system consisting of an infinite number of quanta, any one of those particles and their energy transfers would be identical to any other; in effect being any and all of those places simultaneously until otherwise observed.
Re: Nothing by Nobody Nowhere (No Where = Now Here)
Quote:
Originally Posted by N0B0DY
If we're going to define consciousness as a thing resulting from an a priori reality that would make sense, but as an apriori subprocess that governs all variable a posteriori phenomena, I correlate the wave to subconsciousness and its variable narrowing down to consciousness. I think in this way it is more scientific because we are basing observable reality on conscious observations and therefore any substrate reality would naturally be based on a sublevel of that process.
Re: Nothing by Nobody Nowhere (No Where = Now Here)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Felix Schrodinger
I Kant follow you.
I don't define consciousness as based on a priori stuff that is there just because, but rather the a posteriori stuff is there because it is based on observers' consciousness.
The chain is absolute unconsciousness, absolute universe at absolute velocity; infinite subconsciousness, infinite universe @ superluminal velocities; and finite consciousness, finite universe @ "c" and subluminal velocities.
Linear Mode
