How did matter become aware of itself?

originally posted by: Zitterbewegung
a reply to: cooperton

No DM.

Here in front of everyone:

"Why the Moon is getting further away from Earth"

www.bbc.com...

0.038meters per year is 0.00000001% of the distance to the moon. It could be instrument error, considering a .00000001% error is hard to avoid in any experiment. It could also be part of a larger cycle that is similar to the coming and going of perigee and apogee.

So if that's the greatest deviation you can find then you actually prove my point. The sun and moon are so predictable we know where they were thousands of years ago in the sky on any given day, and also where they will be in the future. That's just the way it is for now at least.

This material world we live in is called a goldi-locks region for good reason. It was made for living beings to inhabit

a reply to: cooperton

Wow. Tell me something. How old is the earth?

originally posted by: Zitterbewegung
a reply to: cooperton

Wow. Tell me something. How old is the earth?

No clue.

Irrelevant and Dumb argument. Stop thread drifting. DM me if you want

originally posted by: cooperton
Our bodies are like the material interface so our conscious quantum selves can have their individual existence and interact with other sentient beings.

That could also be possible without the father figure.

These "intelligent translations" just so happen to uphold the entirety of all matter and the cosmos.

No, they don't.

Pointing out that the sky looks blue on a clear sunny day isn't what makes it look blue. It would be the same even if nobody described it.

a reply to: cooperton

How do you have no clue how old the earth is and why do you want me to direct message you?

"Earth is estimated to be 4.54 billion years old, plus or minus about 50 million years. Scientists have scoured the Earth searching for the oldest rocks to radiometrically date. In northwestern Canada, they discovered rocks about 4.03 billion years old. Then, in Australia, they discovered minerals about 4.3 billion years old. Researchers know that rocks are continuously recycling, due to the rock cycle, so they continued to search for data elsewhere. Since it is thought the bodies in the solar system may have formed at similar times, scientists analyzed moon rocks collected during the moon landing and even meteorites that have crash-landed on Earth. Both of these materials dated to between 4.4 and 4.5 billion years."

www.nationalgeographic.org...

a reply to: TzarChasm

No it's not abstract at all, it's just 'there/not-there'. I'm not saying the forces, waves and such calculate eachothers properties that'd be silly, but they hit/miss eachother and that's all it takes.

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: Zitterbewegung
a reply to: cooperton

No DM.

Here in front of everyone:

"Why the Moon is getting further away from Earth"

www.bbc.com...

0.038meters per year is 0.00000001% of the distance to the moon. It could be instrument error, considering a .00000001% error is hard to avoid in any experiment. It could also be part of a larger cycle that is similar to the coming and going of perigee and apogee.

So if that's the greatest deviation you can find then you actually prove my point. The sun and moon are so predictable we know where they were thousands of years ago in the sky on any given day, and also where they will be in the future. That's just the way it is for now at least.

This material world we live in is called a goldi-locks region for good reason. It was made for living beings to inhabit

Even while you're accepting their claim IS true, without a shred of actual proof for it!

If they'd claimed to measure a deviation of 0.00000001% per year, it wouldn't sound nearly as impressive as their headline reading 'Why the moon is getting further away from Earth', would it?


They despise how all the stars, Sun, moon, and 'planets' are so predictable, since the dawn of time! It shatters their fairy tale story. That's why they make up farcical headlines like this, have so-called 'experts' claim such BS is true, while claiming to have measured it with some sort of instruments, that nobody else can verify at all, just our great 'experts' can do all that, and they will tell us all about it later on, which magically makes it a 'fact'! They've been doing their little act for centuries now, and still do. The reason it has worked for centuries is due to the fact most people don't give a crap about any of it, they accept whatever crap they claim is true, because it's meaningless to them.

So when they spew out excuses like the one above, only those who know it's crap, point out why it's crap, to those who believe it's a 'fact', if they are told it's 'fact' by these so-called 'experts'.

'Evolution', and other claims, are just the same. They use so-called 'experts' to support their BS, with a pile of pseudo-scientific nonsense, packaged as if it were a fact.

Well done, in your pointing out that THIS is crap, btw.

a reply to: turbonium1

Lol exactly. The guy posted a Forbes article to try to make a point about astronomy. The thing is the constellations have also remained constant enough that we still have the same attributes for them since early history. It is clockwork, despite how desperately they want it to be random

originally posted by: Zitterbewegung
a reply to: cooperton

How do you have no clue how old the earth is and why do you want me to direct message you?

"Earth is estimated to be 4.54 billion years old, plus or minus about 50 million years. Scientists have scoured the Earth searching for the oldest rocks to radiometrically date. In northwestern Canada, they discovered rocks about 4.03 billion years old. Then, in Australia, they discovered minerals about 4.3 billion years old. Researchers know that rocks are continuously recycling, due to the rock cycle, so they continued to search for data elsewhere. Since it is thought the bodies in the solar system may have formed at similar times, scientists analyzed moon rocks collected during the moon landing and even meteorites that have crash-landed on Earth. Both of these materials dated to between 4.4 and 4.5 billion years."

www.nationalgeographic.org...

So for radioactive dating, in order to discern the amount of time elapsed, you need to know the "initial amount" of the isotope.



In this experiment they most certainly do not. In fact, your link doesn't even have any experimentation attached to it. It is simply blind faith. But usually experimenters either guess the initial concentration (and thereby can get whatever age they choose [very unscientific]), or they assume the initial isotopic ratio was 100-0.. which is equally absurd because we never get entirely pure samples in nature. I assume this is going over your head because you so far have only posted "science" blog articles.

But no, I do not know the age of the earth, I have no idea how long it existed waste and void. And neither do they.

originally posted by: daskakik
"These "intelligent translations" (physical laws) just so happen to uphold the entirety of all matter and the cosmos."

No, they don't. Pointing out that the sky looks blue on a clear sunny day isn't what makes it look blue. It would be the same even if nobody described it.

Tzarchasm was trying to avoid saying that physical laws are intelligent. The physical laws that uphold all reality persist so precisely that all matter and the cosmos are in a perfected equilibrium that allows all matter and life to exist. If any of the intermolecular forces were to change even the tiniest bit, all matter would either condense on itself or turn to fine dust in an instant. But thankfully it is not too strong or too weak, which is yet another example of a goldi-locks force on the nanoscopic level.

This same Awareness that implemented all physical laws also had the intention for matter to be made as a result of these laws. This Awareness is most obviously Intelligent, and yes I will call this Intelligent Being "Dad" because we are the children. We have inherited that same intelligent spark from our Father, which is where our intelligence is derived. We couldn't have inherited our intelligence from something unintelligent.

a reply to: cooperton

Most Darwinists I know have forfeited any further critical thinking on the topic. It is clearly not possible for the faculty of consciousness to have been generated by random chance. Would you expect it to be possible for the terminator robot to come to be by random chance??? It's absurd to even suggest it, yet that's exactly what evolutionary theory is proposing regarding biological organisms.

It's also the reason why the evolutionary present day scientist honor Einstein and Hawkins
instead of the true genius of Nikola Tesla and Walter Russell.

In my understanding, there is but one consciousness. I believe all of us are but an expression
of Infinite Intelligence. For the most part all of us are laboring under various misconceptions
concerning the truths of existence and consciousness. In my reading it seems a
metaphysical understanding helps to unravel the truth.

I've experienced precognition several times which leads me to believe time as
we understand it is but an illusion. I believe this was possible because our
mind/consciousness is but an extension of the Mind of the Infinite.

Knowledge develops understanding, and wonderful knowledge is derived
from meditation and intuitive apprehension. Greater truths comes to
those who are willing to search for it within.

a reply to: neoholographic

Matter didn't become anything. Matter can't be 'aware' of anything. Matter can't philosophize, and know enough to even realize what 'self' really is (to be fair, most people of this planet don't seem to be able to do this, either).

The way matter was born, was..

(I am translating directly and trying to be as 'word-for-word' perfect as I can, so this may sound a bit clunky in english)

The Creator existed for aeons as just pure light and energy. It sparkled in every portion of space. In fact, the light formed space out of itself.

Unmeasurable time passed.

The pure energy transformed and got different appearance forms.

It was exactly due to the transformation and changes of the pure 'first energy' that the 'natural laws' were first born - laws, that are only different forces of nature acting in perfect harmony with each other.

The basic vibration of the Universe changed to very multifaceted..

..Vibrations were born to different frequencies, or more accurately, the basic vibrations were separated into a series of energy particles that vibrated in different frequencies.

Again, time passed.

Instead of fantastical and bright ('lightful' is probably not a word), pure energy, space started getting more and more forms that belong to physical planes.

Galaxies started being formed, that due to following the motion paths of the cosmic Kundalini (initial/primal energy?), formed into spiral vortex shapes.

The primal energy (there's no proper english word for this, the literal word would be 'beginning energy', but it makes no sense in english) was living and was kept alive exactly due to that active twirling motion.

In fact, the primal energy was a sort of perpetual motion (machine?) that fed itself with its own energies. It's difficult to describe the Creator, because He is always incomprehensible also to me.

However, I will say that the spiral motion of the galaxies was caused by the most primal natural forces that is in effect in them, that I have tried to describe here.

The forming (formation?) of the first galaxies - or galactic nebulas, had started..

..When the transformational (convergent?) creative forces started to approach the material planes - that's when suns were born!

Billions of stars (were?) ignited to shine into the 'foggy' space, and only so that the higher forces could flow towards the slower vibration frequencies - and towards their materialistic form expression/appearance.

Matter was born."

Against this background, doesn't the question about 'matter becoming aware of itself' seem a little silly?

a reply to: cooperton

"Now this is where things become a bit of a "good news/bad news" situation. The bad news, according to Schroder and Smith, is that the Earth will NOT survive the sun's expansion. Even though the Earth could expand to an orbit 50 percent more distant than where it is today (1.5 AUs), it won't get the chance. The expanding sun will engulf the Earth just before it reaches the tip of the red giant phase, and the sun would still have another 0.25 AU and 500,000 years to grow."

phys.org...

Now what happens when the sun sheds mass? It exerts less gravitational force on the planets. Then what happens?
And in your perfect world the sun wouldn't swallow the earth during it's red giant phase.

As for the constellations:

"We assume that the stars' positions in the heavens are eternal. But everything in space is in motion. As our Milky Way rotates, our sun is carried once around the galaxy every 250 million years, slowly drifting up and down through the galaxy's disk, like a horse on a carousel. The stars in the galaxy tug on one another gravitationally, which forces them to shift around. Astronomers know of many clusters of young stars that formed together and are now migrating through the galaxy as a group. And scientists can identify individual cluster members that have been ejected due to gravitational forces exerted by surrounding stars"

"Due to the action of stellar proper motion over millennia, the constellations we see today are altered from the star patterns that the Babylonians saw. In most cases, the changes are barely noticeable, but a few are readily apparent. Advanced astronomy apps such as SkySafari 6, Stellarium Mobile, and Star Walk 2 allow you to view the sky in different eras, so you can travel back in time to see the ancient sky and preview the skies our descendents will enjoy in the far future. "

www.space.com...

a reply to: neoholographic

Apologies if someone has posted this already:

Panpsychism

"In the philosophy of mind, panpsychism is the view that mind or a mindlike aspect is a fundamental and ubiquitous feature of reality.[1] It is also described as a theory that "the mind is a fundamental feature of the world which exists throughout the universe."[2] It is one of the oldest philosophical theories, and has been ascribed to philosophers including Thales, Plato, Spinoza, Leibniz, William James,[3] Alfred North Whitehead, Bertrand Russell, and Galen Strawson.[1] In the 19th century, panpsychism was the default philosophy of mind in Western thought, but it saw a decline in the mid-20th century with the rise of logical positivism.[3][4] Recent interest in the hard problem of consciousness has revived interest in panpsychism.[4][5][6]"

en.wikipedia.org...

a reply to: neoholographic

Here is something to ponder on your quest:

Light does not experience time or distance!

Question: Can you be conscious if you can't experience time and distance?

"Just think about that idea. From the perspective of a photon, there is no such thing as time. It's emitted, and might exist for hundreds of trillions of years, but for the photon, there's zero time elapsed between when it's emitted and when it's absorbed again. It doesn't experience distance either. [SNARK: Clearly, it didn't need to borrow my copy of GQ for the trip.]"

"Since photons can't think, we don't have to worry too much about their existential horror of experiencing neither time nor distance, but it tells us so much about how they're linked together. Through his Theory of Relativity, Einstein helped us understand how time and distance are connected."

phys.org...

originally posted by: Zitterbewegung
a reply to: cooperton

"Now this is where things become a bit of a "good news/bad news" situation. The bad news, according to Schroder and Smith, is that the Earth will NOT survive the sun's expansion. Even though the Earth could expand to an orbit 50 percent more distant than where it is today (1.5 AUs), it won't get the chance. The expanding sun will engulf the Earth just before it reaches the tip of the red giant phase, and the sun would still have another 0.25 AU and 500,000 years to grow."

phys.org...

Now what happens when the sun sheds mass? It exerts less gravitational force on the planets. Then what happens?
And in your perfect world the sun wouldn't swallow the earth during it's red giant phase.

As for the constellations:

"We assume that the stars' positions in the heavens are eternal. But everything in space is in motion. As our Milky Way rotates, our sun is carried once around the galaxy every 250 million years, slowly drifting up and down through the galaxy's disk, like a horse on a carousel. The stars in the galaxy tug on one another gravitationally, which forces them to shift around. Astronomers know of many clusters of young stars that formed together and are now migrating through the galaxy as a group. And scientists can identify individual cluster members that have been ejected due to gravitational forces exerted by surrounding stars"

"Due to the action of stellar proper motion over millennia, the constellations we see today are altered from the star patterns that the Babylonians saw. In most cases, the changes are barely noticeable, but a few are readily apparent. Advanced astronomy apps such as SkySafari 6, Stellarium Mobile, and Star Walk 2 allow you to view the sky in different eras, so you can travel back in time to see the ancient sky and preview the skies our descendents will enjoy in the far future. "

www.space.com...

These supposed alterations are so miniscule that they could either be a margin of error, or part of a larger cycle similar to the precession of the equinox. The fact is that the celestial coordinate system is too precise and consistent to be a random mess. It is an intelligible process that goes forth like clockwork. Clocks are literally made to resemble the predictable coming and going of the sun. Our universe is ordered, not random. I checked today and the sun rose exactly the time it was expected to rise.

a reply to: cooperton

Tzarchasm was trying to avoid saying that physical laws are intelligent.

That is exactly what they did and they are right.

You can believe that an intelligent being set them up that way but that doesn't mean the laws themselves are intelligent.

This Awareness is most obviously Intelligent, and yes I will call this Intelligent Being "Dad" because we are the children.

Call it whatever you want, doesn't make it true. For all you know it could be an equal that created a place similar to how a game designer creates a video game. I certainly wouldn't go around calling video game designers "dad" but if that is your thing...

a reply to: cooperton

Good points and without awareness as something fundamental and outside of what we call material, we wouldn't exist. There would be no experience. Let's look at the evidence.

Like I showed earlier, more and more Scientist are asking is the universe conscious. I remember an article I wrote a thread about where scientist were saying all is vibration.

There's no objective universe all is vibration

www.abovetopsecret.com...

The thread goes into more detail, but just think about this. Scientist say we have a quantum sense of smell in part. What this means is we don't taste food we smell it.

Why you lose your sense of smell and taste when you’ve got a cold

Still, what sucks with both colds and flu (aside from feeling ghastly) is that you can’t even enjoy the flavour of that yummy chicken soup you thought would make you feel better. Of course, it’s because you’ve lost your sense of taste along with your sense of humour. But ever wondered why you can’t taste properly with a cold or stuffy nose?

More importantly though, is to understand that the flavour of food involves both smell and taste. In fact, 80% of our taste is related to smell, so it’s not surprising that most of the flavour of a food comes from your ability to smell it, explains Professor Jeremiah Alt, Assistant Professor of Surgery and Rhinology at University of Utah Hospitals and Clinics.

In an online article on the American Rhinologic Society (ARS) website, he explains that the tongue is your taste organ, as it can sense salty, sweet, sour, bitter and umami (savoury). “Our sense of smell (known as olfaction) provides the rest of a food’s flavour, which is why it’s difficult to appreciate food flavour when you have nasal obstruction from a cold, stuffy nose or rhinosinusitus.”

When you have a cold, the swelling causes inflammation and obstruction, which impairs your smell. The flavour of food is produced only after taste is combined with a smell, so if a stuffy nose impairs your sense of smell, it will also decrease your perception of taste.

When your nose is stuffy, taste receptors in your taste buds have to do the job of assessing food flavour in different taste molecules all on their own. Truth is, even though you have around 2000 and 5000 taste buds on your tongue, in your mouth and throat (with each containing 50 to 100 taste receptor cells) they still don’t come close to what your nose knows!

www.news24.com...

So that steak, chicken salad, slice of pizza or hot wings has no objective taste as any of those things. You only have the experience of eating those things because your NOSE KNOWS as the article says and the reason we have such a robust sense of smell with only 400 scent receptors is because of the quantum nature of smell. Quantum vibrations from odor molecules are converted into an experience of eating pizza or a steak.

When those photons hit your eyes, how do you know the image you're seeing is an objective reality? Cognitive Scientist Donald Hoffman says you're not in his really good book A Case Against Reality.

The Evolutionary Argument Against Reality

The cognitive scientist Donald Hoffman uses evolutionary game theory to show that our perceptions of an independent reality must be illusions.

www.quantamagazine.org...

Look at the Bekenstein Bound which is one of the things that lead you to the Holographic Universe. So your closet can not be filled with matter that occupies the volume of space in your closet because it would collapse into a black hole. The volume of stuff is described by information on the 2D boundary surrounding the volume.

Look at the fact that most of what we call matter is empty space.







I won't even go into other areas of QM like entanglement, non locality, superposition, delayed choice, qubits and more.

When you see someone that looks familiar, you're aware that you might know this person. This activates a search in your brain that looks for the memory that makes them look familiar. How does your brain know which neurons to activate that might bring up the memory you're looking for? Your awareness navigates and operates the information processed by the brain. How does the material brain intitate memory recall? How does the material brain tell the material brain which memory the material brain is looking for?

This shows that in order for a materialist to say we live in a material universe they have to show that an objective material universe exists. It's our awareness that makes it an experience and we have this because of the Breathe of Life from God.

originally posted by: neoholographic
This shows that in order for a materialist to say we live in a material universe they have to show that an objective material universe exists.

Pretty sure if one of them hauls off on your noggin with an aluminum baseball bat and spills your qubits they will have proven their point.

originally posted by: daskakik

Pretty sure if one of them hauls off on your noggin with an aluminum baseball bat and spills your qubits they will have proven their point.

Yeah if you smash the controller you can't play Mario anymore. It doesn't prove that the controller was creating the User. It just shows you can interfere with the interface.

originally posted by: daskakik
similar to how a game designer creates a video game.

Intelligently. Creating code of any sort, whether it be 1's and 0's or physical laws, it requires intelligence. It's crazy how you, an intelligent human being, is arguing against intelligence lol

a reply to: neoholographic

How and when did you become aware of yourself?

originally posted by: cooperton
Yeah if you smash the controller you can't play Mario anymore. It doesn't prove that the controller was creating the User. It just shows you can interfere with the interface.

Who said anything about who was creating who?

That post was woo about material not really existing, "it is all vibrations dude".

My point was that whether that is true or not, interaction in this reality is material and that would back up what neoholographic called materialists.

Intelligently. Creating code of any sort, whether it be 1's and 0's or physical laws, it requires intelligence. It's crazy how you, an intelligent human being, is arguing against intelligence lol

The problem seems to be your lack of comprehension because what I said was that the code isn't intelligent and the coder isn't necessarily your dad.