I'm giving you guys your beloved V back!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[JimmyTheFish]

You guys are smart, go to jimmys board, I can't understand this shit(except the Footloose references ).

I agree -- can we get a mod to move this??


 

[MisterMagoo]

usmoke, keep in mind schroedinger invented the cat hypothetical in order to mock the inherent problems with the uncertainty principle. i'm extremely dubious about the possibility that the world doesn't exist when no one sees it, because that doesn't explain why multiple people observing things independently and at different times will all describe it the same way.

furthermore it just throws out a lot of standard concepts such as how our eyes work, assuming rather than our brains have an actual profound effect on the world around us, as though our senses are proactive rather than reactive. i'm more than a little skeptical of the type of theoretical physics that tells me that when i'm not looking at my shoes they're everywhere and only lock into one place when i look at them.

but then i'll give it time to flesh out and will reserve final judgment for now.

[SHUTUPANDTRAIN]

You guys are smart, go to jimmys board, I can't understand this shit(except the Footloose references ).

OH...I see...But I can't get any credit for the Batman & Robin or New Jack City reference...

[danielson]

OH...I see...But I can't get any credit for the Batman & Robin or New Jack City reference...

I dug the Nino Brown shit too

[SHUTUPANDTRAIN]

I dug the Nino Brown shit too

Thanks...and I agree with Kiwi...

Did anyone really understand Nino Brown and the depth of his Oracle?

[Necrosis]

hey john edwards probably can talk to the dead. gary schwartz proved it


thats the weirdness of quantum physics. i wouldnt say they are everywere. just that they could potentially be anywere. and consciousnous selects the actuality to which we see. who knows. the other infinite potentialities could come into actuality in other parellel universes, something that has been proposed in string physics.



i almost beleive that consciousnous is the chief reality and matter is the epiphenominal creation from consciousnous. goswami champions this theory to a degree. he basically states that the universe came into existence(all 15 billion years) in the blink of an eye when consciousnous was one of those potentials that was exhausted.

 

[MisterMagoo]

the problem with such metaphysical interpretations is they have VERY little grounding. and it doesn't really explain uniformity, because consciousness is variable and it would mean that if people went crazy the actual world would change, not just our perception of it.

i think the principles work in the scope of our relationship WITH the world, but not with the world itself. no matter what happens with my consciousness, my cheap little sudoku rubik's cube isn't going to move or do anything. and even if i got batshit insane and think it sprouted wings and is flying around... it hasn't. it's merely how my brain is firing.

i think consciousness is an illusion anyway. it's a byproduct of advanced brain development and anything with a nervous system has a degree of consciousness. keep in mind a few hundred years ago people thought animals couldn't feel pain. metaphysical explanations of the world are all in a realm of "whoa wouldn't it be cool if?" as far as i'm concerned.

[Tapeworm]

usmoke, keep in mind schroedinger invented the cat hypothetical in order to mock the inherent problems with the uncertainty principle.

That's a common misconception.  In truth, the guy just really hated cats!

"does the world exist when i can't see it?"

the answer to this question is no, according to many interpretations of quantum physics. the photoelectric effect or wave/particle duality is collapsed into particles by consciousnous. this was shown in the double slit experiment.

Nonsense.  "Beholding" by consciousness is unaffected by particle/wave duality unless it's the observed phenomenon you're referring to  - you are analyzing the physical brain.  The consciousness you are examining is "multi-brainal" even "pre-brainal."  "Brain" is predicate to "mind" in that consciousness exists, the brain is just the vehicle IMHO.

and to kiwi's defence i dont think he was trying to tie bacon and the second law. merely the implications.

No laws for Bacon!  That tractor chicken race was AWESOME!

[sandycoosworth]

what none of you realize is the v board was started because ron was afraid to stand up to the regulars of the X and impose my new world order which was voted in with a staggering majority


as a consequence, the v board is by definition a bitch board

.


i suggest ron scrap everything but the X and just use it as a dumping grounds

thank you and dog bless

[Necrosis]

the problem with such metaphysical interpretations is they have VERY little grounding. and it doesn't really explain uniformity, because consciousness is variable and it would mean that if people went crazy the actual world would change, not just our perception of it.

i think the principles work in the scope of our relationship WITH the world, but not with the world itself. no matter what happens with my consciousness, my cheap little sudoku rubik's cube isn't going to move or do anything. and even if i got batshit insane and think it sprouted wings and is flying around... it hasn't. it's merely how my brain is firing.

i think consciousness is an illusion anyway. it's a byproduct of advanced brain development and anything with a nervous system has a degree of consciousness. keep in mind a few hundred years ago people thought animals couldn't feel pain. metaphysical explanations of the world are all in a realm of "whoa wouldn't it be cool if?" as far as i'm concerned.

well with your example your also making the assumption that is your consciousnous that counts or that your consciousnous is seperate. i tend to disagree with this. quantum entanglement shows that literally everything is one, and during phase entanglement your consciousnous along with a rock on alpha sentori were in contact, in consequence becoming entangled. this is how i beleive the universe works, it is the collective, or should i say the one that creates everything. your seperation is an illusion. im not calling for the ancient mystic interpretation, but the quantum physics interpretation. your also ruling out the actual effect mind has on matter. like psychokinesis which is in the process of being proven. telepathy is already an established fact if you look at the research. i think the telepathy example is another indicator of entanglement, we all share the thoughts of others, were jsut not aware. similar to jungs collective unconscious.

i dont think consciousnous is an illusion, how can something objective create something subjective, as well as free will.

[Necrosis]

Nonsense.  "Beholding" by consciousness is unaffected by particle/wave duality unless it's the observed phenomenon you're referring to  - you are analyzing the physical brain.  The consciousness you are examining is "multi-brainal" even "pre-brainal."  "Brain" is predicate to "mind" in that consciousness exists, the brain is just the vehicle IMHO.

not following your logic. brain is a quantum event. it has been proven that observing collapses the wave function. it is needed, it is interactive. what is non-sense? the world exists as a potentiality until consciousnous collapses it into actuality. you cant seperate them. this was proven, and can be done over and over. the could be other interpretations. photons also are non-local and communicate faster then light, they seem to have consciousnous. this was also shown by the quantum eraser experiment. the most elementary thing in the universe is consciousnous imo, not matter. things can also communicate backwards in time to change the present.

 i would disagree with brain producing mind also. a new NDE study will come out soon that could prove my theory.

[Tapeworm]

Cool.  I pretty much agree, but I don't share your mysticism about psychokinesis or telepathy, and I'm slow to accept much from Jung since he's a bit of a mystic himself with his "synchronicity," although the Police alblum of the same name is a classic. 

Also, kindly disregard my earlier post where I was confusing electrons (in the brain) with photons (in the wave/particle experiment).  I once confused a girl for her sister too while dating the other sister, but that's a confusing story. 

[Necrosis]

Cool.  I pretty much agree, but I don't share your mysticism about psychokinesis or telepathy, and I'm slow to accept much from Jung since he's a bit of a mystic himself with his "synchronicity," although the Police alblum of the same name is a classic. 

Also, kindly disregard my earlier post where I was confusing electrons (in the brain) with photons (in the wave/particle experiment).  I once confused a girl for her sister too while dating the other sister, but that's a confusing story. 

i wont disregard your post. you will be crucified for life