|
hTx
(:



Registered: 03/27/13
Posts: 5,724
Loc: Space-time
|
Biocentrism
#19137996 - 11/14/13 07:53 PM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2503370/Quantum-physics-proves-IS-afterlife-claims-scientist.html
I read an article today in which a professor from Wake Forest University School of Medicine in North Carolina claims to have evidence that life and biology are central towards reality and that life creates the universe, not the other way around.
He also goes on to claim that death as we know it, is an illusion.
So, what do you think?
Did the universe create life?
Or did life create the universe?
-------------------- zen by age ten times six hundred lifetimes Light up the darkness.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery



Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Biocentrism [Re: hTx] 1
#19138132 - 11/14/13 08:19 PM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
wowza yowza. DA ftw.  
Seriously, nobody knows the answers to these questions and debating the same issue 1000+1 times won't solve it.
-------------------- "Don't believe everything you think". -Anom. " All that lives was born to die"-Anom. With much wisdom comes much sorrow, The more knowledge, the more grief. Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC
|
hTx
(:



Registered: 03/27/13
Posts: 5,724
Loc: Space-time
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said: wowza yowza. DA ftw.  
Seriously, nobody knows the answers to these questions and debating the same issue 1000+1 times won't solve it.
DA ftw if you don't want to discuss it no reason to plainly state that you don't, just dont.
-------------------- zen by age ten times six hundred lifetimes Light up the darkness.
|
r72rock
Maybe so. Maybe not.




Registered: 01/06/09
Posts: 1,327
Loc: Chicago
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said: wowza yowza. DA ftw.  
Seriously, nobody knows the answers to these questions and debating the same issue 1000+1 times won't solve it.
I mean, maybe? But I don't think that's fair to his argument. I've read about this guy before, and I personally wasn't impressed, but I do think that saying that "nobody knows the answers to these questions" kind of puts us in a corner to say that we'll never know. I mean, that could be right. We may never know; or we may come to know, but imprisoning ourselves in a box just limits the human capacity to learn. Some people never thought we could make it to the moon.
-------------------- Current favorite candy: Peanut Butter Kisses
|
Gorlax



Registered: 05/06/08
Posts: 6,695
Last seen: 16 days, 12 hours
|
|
Life is simply a biological hack of chemistry. We perceive what evolution has geared us to perceive. Of course different organisms see things differently, which then shapes that organisms view of the universe.
Example: An ant lives in the same climate as us, but see the world entirely differently. What prevents this same paradox from affecting us? Life is crazy as fuck, trying to uncover it in philosophical terms has been tried over and over.
I find it strange that we measure time in a circular fashion (I.E. a Clock) but we utilize it in a linear way. We can never go back from the starting point. Thus we live in a world of infinite continuity. Zeno’s paradox explains how motion is simply an illusion because of this.
When we get into this level of thinking, it is almost impossible to stay clear of paradoxes.
|
hTx
(:



Registered: 03/27/13
Posts: 5,724
Loc: Space-time
|
Re: Biocentrism [Re: r72rock]
#19138224 - 11/14/13 08:41 PM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Personally, I haven't read his books or anything but I've always felt what he says about life creating the universe to be atleast partially true because, well, it is.
Even E=mc2 is just a mental construct we use, a map, to describe apart of the universe. The map is not the terrirory.
We get quantum effects because of how we the observer, effect reality, just by the act of observing it. Meaning all reality is truly a perception and that perception has much more to do with reality than "thats just like, your opinion man.".
-------------------- zen by age ten times six hundred lifetimes Light up the darkness.
|
Astral Piper
Voivod



Registered: 05/02/07
Posts: 262
Loc: Hell
Last seen: 6 years, 30 days
|
Re: Biocentrism [Re: Gorlax]
#19138257 - 11/14/13 08:47 PM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
If we start from the assumption that reality is comprised of an infinite number of alternatives (the theory of the multiverse) then isn't it implicit that we cannot know for sure whether biocentrism, or any metaphysical assumption, is in fact "universal?"
-------------------- Syd Barrett at his final appearance with Pink Floyd on December 22, 1967:
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery



Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Biocentrism [Re: hTx]
#19138270 - 11/14/13 08:50 PM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
hTx said:
Quote:
Icelander said: wowza yowza. DA ftw.  
Seriously, nobody knows the answers to these questions and debating the same issue 1000+1 times won't solve it.
DA ftw if you don't want to discuss it no reason to plainly state that you don't, just dont. 
I was discussing it. Can't help it of you don't like that take on it.
-------------------- "Don't believe everything you think". -Anom. " All that lives was born to die"-Anom. With much wisdom comes much sorrow, The more knowledge, the more grief. Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery



Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Biocentrism [Re: hTx]
#19138293 - 11/14/13 08:54 PM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Personally, I haven't read his books or anything but I've always felt what he says about life creating the universe to be atleast partially true because, well, it is.
I can see how our perceptions tell us what form the universe seems to take but how is that necessarily creating the actual universe? There may well be something distinct out there but our brain perceives it in some other way. That's different than the act of "material" creation imo.
-------------------- "Don't believe everything you think". -Anom. " All that lives was born to die"-Anom. With much wisdom comes much sorrow, The more knowledge, the more grief. Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC
|
Gorlax



Registered: 05/06/08
Posts: 6,695
Last seen: 16 days, 12 hours
|
|
If "this sentence is false" is true, then the sentence is false, which is a contradiction. Conversely, if "this sentence is false" is false, then the sentence is true, which is also a contradiction.
|
White Beard

Registered: 08/13/11
Posts: 6,325
|
|
That was so poorly written. It just kept repeating the same few sentences over and over.
Also, I hope you are aware that observation changes the results because the instruments used to measure subatomic particles effect the particles themselves. Electrons are so small that photons, which have no mass, can still effect the movement of the electron.
|
Rahz
Alive Again



Registered: 11/10/05
Posts: 9,230
|
Re: Biocentrism [Re: hTx] 1
#19139033 - 11/14/13 11:20 PM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
It seems the subject is difficult because at best it appears there are two correct answers which are at odds with each other. The same problem can be seen in the difficulty resolving mechanics with randomness. We do see unpredictability at work in nature so it seems clear that the whole contains elements which when defined don't need or lead to the other. They simply exist together. Determinism can be proven. Randomness can be proven. We can't prove how one causes the other, we can only prove a hierarchy of causality. This would indicate that consciousness is more basic than matter if one considers the quantum level being a necessary function of matter springing into existence. But for me there's a great leap of logic between an eternal potential for something to occur in space-time and saying it's an eternal happening. No proof was given and nothing on the page convinced me of it.
It matters little in the end because it's the 'ego' that will die, and it's the ego that is worried about dying. It's a function of being alive that is simply happening along with everything else. You can flog it, love it, ignore it, reason with it but it will always be an ego. Eventually we can let go of it. By seeing the self as an expression manifested from an eternal potential I think a person can find a way to rationalize their own death being of no consequence. Life goes on. These bodies don't have to go away mad, they just have to go away.
-------------------- rahz comfort pleasure power love truth awareness peace "You’re not looking close enough if you can only see yourself in people who look like you." —Ayishat Akanbi
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,534
|
Re: Biocentrism [Re: Rahz]
#19139065 - 11/14/13 11:28 PM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
That doctor author is as flakey as they come. His explanation of double slit conclusions is whacked. The cornerstones of his his arguments are flawed. But this doesnt mean he cant publish books or sell creams. Maybe he has a biocentric hair gel?
--------------------
_ 🧠 _
|
hTx
(:



Registered: 03/27/13
Posts: 5,724
Loc: Space-time
|
|
Quote:
redgreenvines said: That doctor author is as flakey as they come. His explanation of double slit conclusions is whacked. The cornerstones of his his arguments are flawed. But this doesnt mean he cant publish books or sell creams. Maybe he has a biocentric hair gel?

possibly lol
I think i'm going to give his book a read though
-------------------- zen by age ten times six hundred lifetimes Light up the darkness.
|
hTx
(:



Registered: 03/27/13
Posts: 5,724
Loc: Space-time
|
|
Quote:
White Beard said: That was so poorly written. It just kept repeating the same few sentences over and over.
Also, I hope you are aware that observation changes the results because the instruments used to measure subatomic particles effect the particles themselves. Electrons are so small that photons, which have no mass, can still effect the movement of the electron.
the instruments as in our own eyes/brain
-------------------- zen by age ten times six hundred lifetimes Light up the darkness.
|
Rahz
Alive Again



Registered: 11/10/05
Posts: 9,230
|
Re: Biocentrism [Re: hTx]
#19139285 - 11/15/13 12:21 AM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
You can affect your environment, but can you pull a rabbit out of your hat?
-------------------- rahz comfort pleasure power love truth awareness peace "You’re not looking close enough if you can only see yourself in people who look like you." —Ayishat Akanbi
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery



Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Biocentrism [Re: hTx]
#19139633 - 11/15/13 03:28 AM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
hTx said:
Quote:
redgreenvines said: That doctor author is as flakey as they come. His explanation of double slit conclusions is whacked. The cornerstones of his his arguments are flawed. But this doesnt mean he cant publish books or sell creams. Maybe he has a biocentric hair gel?

possibly lol
I think i'm going to give his book a read though
I'm sure you'll find a way to embrace it's truth.
-------------------- "Don't believe everything you think". -Anom. " All that lives was born to die"-Anom. With much wisdom comes much sorrow, The more knowledge, the more grief. Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC
|
White Beard

Registered: 08/13/11
Posts: 6,325
|
Re: Biocentrism [Re: hTx]
#19139767 - 11/15/13 06:00 AM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
hTx said:
Quote:
White Beard said: That was so poorly written. It just kept repeating the same few sentences over and over.
Also, I hope you are aware that observation changes the results because the instruments used to measure subatomic particles effect the particles themselves. Electrons are so small that photons, which have no mass, can still effect the movement of the electron.
the instruments as in our own eyes/brain
Nope, sorry. I suggest you read up on the double slit experiment rather then wasting your time with this pseudoscience.
|
Cognitive_Shift
CS actual




Registered: 12/11/07
Posts: 29,591
|
|
A pretty cool theory but it wouldn't take it to seriously. Any metaphysics theory shouldn't be taken too seriously.
-------------------- L'enfer est plein de bonnes volontés et désirs
|
hTx
(:



Registered: 03/27/13
Posts: 5,724
Loc: Space-time
|
|
Quote:
White Beard said:
Quote:
hTx said:
Quote:
White Beard said: That was so poorly written. It just kept repeating the same few sentences over and over.
Also, I hope you are aware that observation changes the results because the instruments used to measure subatomic particles effect the particles themselves. Electrons are so small that photons, which have no mass, can still effect the movement of the electron.
the instruments as in our own eyes/brain
Nope, sorry. I suggest you read up on the double slit experiment rather then wasting your time with this pseudoscience.
 I suggest you read up on quantum theory. Yes, the instruments used to measure subatomic particles do effect the particles themselves, but this isn't the reason why a system exists in 'yes, maybe, no' until observed.
Take shrodingers cat for example.
Quantum physics informs us that a system exists in superposition — that is, in all possible states — until we observe that it is only in one specific state. The act of observation happens with or without instruments.
What your suggesting is that quantum physics is based off a mistake caused by photons effecting the measurement...which is a pretty wild claim.
-------------------- zen by age ten times six hundred lifetimes Light up the darkness.
|
hTx
(:



Registered: 03/27/13
Posts: 5,724
Loc: Space-time
|
|
Quote:
Cognitive_Shift said: A pretty cool theory but it wouldn't take it to seriously. Any metaphysics theory shouldn't be taken too seriously.
Biocentrism isn't a metaphysical theory.
Pretty interesting that anytime anyone suggests that there is more to reality than what we can see with our own two eyes, despite the fact that our own two eyes can only interpret a very small percentage of whats really going on on the electromagnetic scale, that it is automatically dismissed as 'metaphysics'.
See whats happening here?
People are subscribing to a theory (materialism) as absolute truth.
Sounds pretty dogmatic to me.
-------------------- zen by age ten times six hundred lifetimes Light up the darkness.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery



Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Biocentrism [Re: hTx]
#19140564 - 11/15/13 11:21 AM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Well that would be a mistake wouldn't it. No one knows the answers to these kinds of questions. I certainly have my own suspicions but frankly the more I learn the less certain I feel about anything and everything (only a slight exaggeration) . The difficulty for most humans (it seems) is that craving for certainty in a universe mostly beyond our understanding. It makes us take stances often that are not solid ground. It's to be expected though it's one of our least appealing attributes.
I do think the advice to not take any of it too seriously is good advice. Maybe just not for the reasons some say that.
-------------------- "Don't believe everything you think". -Anom. " All that lives was born to die"-Anom. With much wisdom comes much sorrow, The more knowledge, the more grief. Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC
|
Sleepwalker
Overshoes

Registered: 05/07/08
Posts: 5,503
|
Re: Biocentrism [Re: hTx]
#19140604 - 11/15/13 11:31 AM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
hTx said: claims to have evidence that life and biology are central towards reality and that life creates the universe, not the other way around.
Any time a human claims they know what is "central towards reality" or something similar I just have to laugh.
|
Cognitive_Shift
CS actual




Registered: 12/11/07
Posts: 29,591
|
Re: Biocentrism [Re: hTx]
#19141071 - 11/15/13 02:10 PM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
hTx said:
Quote:
Cognitive_Shift said: A pretty cool theory but it wouldn't take it to seriously. Any metaphysics theory shouldn't be taken too seriously.
Biocentrism isn't a metaphysical theory.
Pretty interesting that anytime anyone suggests that there is more to reality than what we can see with our own two eyes, despite the fact that our own two eyes can only interpret a very small percentage of whats really going on on the electromagnetic scale, that it is automatically dismissed as 'metaphysics'.
See whats happening here?
People are subscribing to a theory (materialism) as absolute truth.
Sounds pretty dogmatic to me.
I'm not subscribing to any theory, in fact i do think there is more to reality then meets the eye. You can't marry any of your models for reality just entertain them... after all they are only models and we are only people.
-------------------- L'enfer est plein de bonnes volontés et désirs
|
White Beard

Registered: 08/13/11
Posts: 6,325
|
Re: Biocentrism [Re: hTx]
#19141105 - 11/15/13 02:24 PM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
hTx said:
Quote:
White Beard said:
Quote:
hTx said:
Quote:
White Beard said: That was so poorly written. It just kept repeating the same few sentences over and over.
Also, I hope you are aware that observation changes the results because the instruments used to measure subatomic particles effect the particles themselves. Electrons are so small that photons, which have no mass, can still effect the movement of the electron.
the instruments as in our own eyes/brain
Nope, sorry. I suggest you read up on the double slit experiment rather then wasting your time with this pseudoscience.
 I suggest you read up on quantum theory. Yes, the instruments used to measure subatomic particles do effect the particles themselves, but this isn't the reason why a system exists in 'yes, maybe, no' until observed.
Take shrodingers cat for example.
Quantum physics informs us that a system exists in superposition — that is, in all possible states — until we observe that it is only in one specific state. The act of observation happens with or without instruments.
That thought experiment was used to point out a contradiction in the model for QM at the time. It's suppose to be absurd on purpose.
From wiki on schrodingers cat:
"The thought experiment illustrates quantum mechanics and the mathematics necessary to describe quantum states. Intended as a critique of just the Copenhagen interpretation (the prevailing orthodoxy in 1935), the "Schrodinger's Cat" thought experiment remains a typical touchstone for limited interpretations of quantum mechanics."
Quote:
What your suggesting is that quantum physics is based off a mistake caused by photons effecting the measurement...which is a pretty wild claim.
Didn't say that. I was saying the reason there is uncertainty in observing subatomic particles is that the instruments used to measure the particles effect the particles. Particles don't randomly change when we look at them like we have magic powers.
from wiki on uncertainty principle:
"The principle is quite counter-intuitive, so the early students of quantum theory had to be reassured that naive measurements to violate it, were bound always to be unworkable. One way in which Heisenberg originally illustrated the intrinsic impossibility of violating the uncertainty principle is by using an imaginary microscope as a measuring device.[56]
He imagines an experimenter trying to measure the position and momentum of an electron by shooting a photon at it.
Problem 1 – If the photon has a short wavelength, and therefore, a large momentum, the position can be measured accurately. But the photon scatters in a random direction, transferring a large and uncertain amount of momentum to the electron. If the photon has a long wavelength and low momentum, the collision does not disturb the electron's momentum very much, but the scattering will reveal its position only vaguely. Problem 2 – If a large aperture is used for the microscope, the electron's location can be well resolved (see Rayleigh criterion); but by the principle of conservation of momentum, the transverse momentum of the incoming photon and hence, the new momentum of the electron resolves poorly. If a small aperture is used, the accuracy of both resolutions is the other way around"Quote:
hTx said:
Quote:
Cognitive_Shift said: A pretty cool theory but it wouldn't take it to seriously. Any metaphysics theory shouldn't be taken too seriously.
Biocentrism isn't a metaphysical theory.
Pretty interesting that anytime anyone suggests that there is more to reality than what we can see with our own two eyes, despite the fact that our own two eyes can only interpret a very small percentage of whats really going on on the electromagnetic scale, that it is automatically dismissed as 'metaphysics'.
See whats happening here?
People are subscribing to a theory (materialism) as absolute truth.
Sounds pretty dogmatic to me.
Science constantly finds out that there is more to reality then what meets our eyes. Do you really think materialists don't believe in IR and UV light, subatomic particles, and far away planets because they can't been seen with the naked eye? We aren't being hard heads with this whole evidence thing, it's just that there is no way to talk about something if there is no evidence. Any other talk without evidence is wild speculation and not science. Since no test has been devised for this biocentric universe, it's still in the speculation phase.
|
Gorlax



Registered: 05/06/08
Posts: 6,695
Last seen: 16 days, 12 hours
|
|
Okay, somehow we got like 20 theories mashed up into this.
Quantum mechanics describes particles that are very small. Yes, it is known that observing the particle changes it. This is the elementary part of it.
Quantum mechanics makes sense (electrons and other subatomic particles follow these principles to the TEE) but the connection between classical mechanics and quantum mechanics is what the big problem is.
^
These really don't change the idea of bio-centrism.
Bio-centrism meaning life is the center of the universe, the reverse is the universe is the center.
As I was trying to point across earlier these arguments are simply paradoxes.
Observing life as an ANT, is drastically different from that of a lion!
The ant has no clue that an exterior view point is present b/c lack of knowledge.
In conclusion
It's futile...
We have so much to learn still
|
White Beard

Registered: 08/13/11
Posts: 6,325
|
Re: Biocentrism [Re: Gorlax]
#19141230 - 11/15/13 03:00 PM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
There's so many theories mashed up because new agers love to throw in some complicated science they don't understand when they run out of arguments.
|
PocketLady



Registered: 01/18/10
Posts: 1,773
|
Re: Biocentrism [Re: hTx]
#19141341 - 11/15/13 03:29 PM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Lol, that article is a complete joke. But then those who are familiar with British newspapers would know that that pretty much sums up Daily Mail. There is not one single fact in that article that proves anything. Can't believe they even have the nerve to use that word.
-------------------- Love is from the infinite, and will remain until eternity. The seeker of love escapes the chains of birth and death. Tomorrow, when resurrection comes, The heart that is not in love will fail the test. ~ Rumi The day we start giving Love instead of seeking Love, we will have re-written our whole destiny. ~ Swami Chinmayanada Saraswatir
|
|