The Usual Suspects Quote: "The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist."

 

I did not mean that physical entities are in fact mathematical entities, but instead that they are shaped to represent numeric forms or "numbers as figures" [numerically molded physical quantum substrate], and that physical aspect is also essential to enable the integration of actual numerals ["figures"] into new ones [to exert the calculations]. So the physical substance is just 1. a carrier of numerals, and 2. it enables them to integrate though calculation (integration, addition) by physical movement and meeting of physically shaped numeric forms.

 

The new god is here: money (The love of money was the undoing).
The new Greek gods are now: Smart Phone, Apple, FaceBook, YouTube, Amazon, Elon Musk and Wall Street.

Here is the new dollar bill: " IN GOD WE TRUST" became " IN MONEY WE TRUST".

 

Bigelow Institute for Consciousness Studies - Mission Statement

The mission of BICS is to communicate, facilitate, educate and organize scientific research and exploration into the survival of human consciousness. These efforts shall focus particularly on consciousness surviving permanent bodily death. Additionally, research and investigations shall embrace all areas of human consciousness that can acquire information and/or cause effects upon space, time, animate or inanimate subject matter without the use of conventional means.

www.bigelowinstitute.org

Full interview with Robert Bigelow about contest

Robert Thomas Bigelow (born May 12, 1945) is a US billionaire and owner of the Budget Suites of America hotel chain. He is the founder of Bigelow Aerospace Las Vegas, Nevada, a company that worked on the development of a private commercial inflatable space station (Commercial Space Station Skywalker). Bigelow has a personal interest in exploring ufology.

 

To all of you who say that don't believe in God, if you TRULY and SINCERELY want to have the answer, I give you a clear way to get it.
The most important part is to be sincere, God can't be fooled.
So you basically speak to God in the way that you can, but you have to be completely honest. Tell and ask God for a proof of his existence, ask for help in something that only the Lord can help you. You can even set a timeline, God is good and he will do something in the way that only He can do, and you will get to know that He exists and loves you. All he demands is that you obey and love him. He will love you back, and you will see how your life begins to change. But of course you will still have problems in life, but with the Lord's help, you can overcome anything.
I can testify with my life, and my family can too. We have seen the power of the Lord doing things only He can do, I'm speaking of miracles here. And not only one miracle.
John 8:32 - "Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”

From the bottom of my heart and soul, I tell you, big things and good things are waiting for you. You just need to get ready and serious and decided to change your life, for the good.

EDIT: I don't mean to offend, but as science says (big bang), go smash rocks against each other and tell me when you create life out of it.

 

Last edited: May 15, 2022

Sorry, not my fault - God made me do it.

 

This thread is not about religion. It's about rationale of a possible creator of the World, or maybe τὸ κινοῦν ἀκίνητον (first unmoved mover - Aristotle). The second view just supposes that the movement was introduced into the World by an unmoved being outside of it. It doesn't explain the origin of the already existing static world.
In cybernetic interpretation of the World, it is very likely that there exists (or existed) its creator, and that most probably the creator himself is (was) some kind of a cybernetic being [entity, even an intelligent machine]. If the World is a cybernetic phenomena is yet to be proven, but if it is, it is almost certain that it had its creator [cybernetics is possible only as a consequence of some causa finalis [some end/plan].

 

Last edited: May 15, 2022

There is a catch, then who created the creator? I think the mathematicians and the celestial observers will not find a solution. Unless they occupy themselves more with the quantum physics. I think we should approach the thing differently. Perhaps one should state first that it has not succeeded yet to deliver a conclusive explanation how all this works. One can use an electron microscope and look even more purely, that will also give no answers. It can also be that our brain is not designed to really understand it.

My thesis would be: Consciousness creates matter. Consciousness is immaterial and not measurable but last and everywhere present.

Who is interested:
Pim van Lommel: Consciousness never dies || March 2021

What comes after death cannot be understood through intellectual argument or discussion. The absolute truth cannot be proven scientifically, because it cannot be perceived, it cannot be objectified and it cannot be grasped by our senses. For this reason, scientists cannot draw any compelling conclusions about the immortality of the soul and life after this life, and nothing can convince them otherwise. ... The objective world is only half of the universe. What we perceive with our senses is not the whole world. The other half of the universe, made up of our consciousness, thoughts, and feelings, cannot be explained through the sensory perception of external things. …

The soul is not created. It is essentially conscious and perfect. After detachment from the material body, everything hidden remains intact. The soul remains. Our soul remains perfect forever and is neither destroyed nor dissolved after death. Life and death are just two names for the same thing; the two sides of a coin. … We do not fear death, but the fear of death. The dying process itself is not painful, it is rather a change of circumstances. Inadequate preparation and attachments cause pain to be experienced at the moment of death. One suffers because one is unable to fully let go.
Swami Rama 1925-1996 Pim van Lommel, Endless Consciousness pp. 336-337

More Infos: www.panoramic-art.de/en/gesammelte-weisheiten/

 

Last edited: May 15, 2022

That is always the easy thing to say. It's so comfortable to state, "afterlife is too high a concept to be understood by us, but it's there.". Great. In this infinite room you can place any fantasy into it that suits you.

A wonderful and soothing image. I would accept it in an instant, seriously, if it wasn't that hollow. All concepts like this are based on speculation, and many of them are meant well. But obviously, they are just fantasies, made up to ease the inconvenient possibility that after death, there is simply nothing. Not cold, not warm, not beautiful, not ugly, nothing. You lose your consciousness and don't wake up. End of line. No newline.
I could guess that my consciousness - It should be rather that, instead of a soul - moves on to the next "plane", let's say, another universe where the game begins anew. But why would I ? It's just blindly guessing, holding on to a single thread that the universe at least cares a bit for me.

To make a link to the original question, you can always build a fantastic construct how the world runs in your favor. I for myself have thought that I feel something or seomeone who I am loosely a part of - sharing some very thin connections, and this being that I am a tiny part of it, has some connection to me. For the time being, like (I am) a nerve that is welcome to feel, but not really missed when dying off, because of having billions of others, and getting always new ones. Or a memory that fades. That being might be responsible for the creation of the universe, or only for the creation of life, or only sit in a corner of my brain and helps me getting through life. But on it's intelligence, if it exists, I have to stick on the 'God created (wo)man in its own image'.

 

Then, to be consistent, who created the consciousness? If it is immaterial and not measurable does not avoid this question.

 

imagine this is all random

 

Right question! I think our programming as humans does not allow these questions. In short we are not able to answer these real important questions. One could say "I know that I know nothing". Perhaps a UFO lands soon here and explains us the world.

 

man sorry I have to. killah priest

 

How could you not believe in a metaphysical entity? Call it what you will. There is no scientist that would seriously tell you that ALL things can be explained with science and naturally occurred phenomenon. They cannot. Fact. I choose to explain the unknown as the metaphysical. But that has been revealed to me as the unknowns in my life that have truly sprung up to be something of great benefit to my life. Pre determined I cannot say. I have had a charmed life of which none of it or very little has sprung from my good choices and hard work. The only explanation is it came from is a directive that needed me for a purpose. I follow that purpose because it can be of great benefit to others now by Charity, Hope and Love. What better way to live a fulfilled life.

 

Firstly @pratyahara, to avoid any misunderstanding, I have disagreed with several of the details in your earlier comments, e.g., I still can't see any logical or empirical support for actualising your cybernetics metaphors, but I do respect what I perceive to be the authentic tone of your posts, i.e., a desire to speculate but also to test and verify speculations - and we're all just speculating.

So with this comment

Please excuse me hijacking this comment for a rant
(my rant is not about your question but about the broader issues that it raises)...

I agree with the core of your question, but I would want to remove what I see as the biased part,
i.e., you asked "who created the consciousness?"
Just using the word 'who' immediately derails the purity of the pursuit for authentic knowledge.
It suggests a 'must find a creator' bias.
I would prefer to ask your question more neutrally with questions like...
- "what is consciousness?";
- "what enables consciousness?";
- "where, and under what circumstances, do we observe consciousness to exist?"
These questions (and many more similar) enable empirically viable pursuits.
These questions seek authentic answers, no matter what, or how personally uncomfortable, those answers turn out to be.
These questions avoid the bias of chasing after any pre-assumed answers, like the fantasised existence of a preferred creator.

En route to answering 'what is consciousness?', one (of several) meagre facts that humanity has on the table so far is that zero evidence exists for detecting consciousness outside of living biological brains.
A thoroughly reliable repeatable empirical observation is:-
"Squash the brain and all signs of consciousness cease to be observable"
In the name of science - I invite several forum members to repeat the above experiment.

A related social-science observation (rampant on this forum and everywhere else) seems to be that personal fears of that reality, i.e., when your brain is dust - you are gone! - seems to be the driving force behind an unlimited supply of deranged delusional fantasies. (what a waste when we do actually need more good science fiction scripts! )

In contrast to those misplaced fantasies, the actual credible efforts at authentically understanding consciousness are truly awesome.

We have thousands of years of philosophy
(with brilliant insights, no definitive solutions, and a growing catalogue of much sharper questions)

We have hundreds of years of science
(with brilliant insights, no definitive solutions, and a growing catalogue much sharper questions)

We have decades of neuro-science and cognitive-science chipping away at finding correlations between brain activity and mental activity (and still arguably no closer to understanding the 'hard problem' of consciousness.)

All the above means that 'consciousness' is a topic worthy of the utmost respect. What could be closer to home (for all of us) than finding the right reality-based authentic answers to questions like "what are our brains actually doing?"

It is therefore a really tragic nightmare to see the wonderful pursuit of 'understanding consciousness' grotesquely debased with grubby claptrap, dressed in utterly pretentious phoney pseudo-science, and motivated solely by propping up prejudiced, biased, presupposed fantasy solutions. There is an infinite supply of these garbage non-solutions, of which the "Pim van Lommel" flavour mentioned above is just one utterly peurile example.

Why - why - why do people waste even a few seconds of their one and only lifetime chasing after this total garbage when so much truly awesome decent science is readily available to consult? In the 21st Century, no-one has any excuses for being conned by garbage when torrents of real science are so readily available to just pour into your life.
But that social-pyscho-science mystery is already answered - people have a really pathetic fear of their own mortality, and an equally pathetic fear of their cosmic insignificance, and they will do literally anything to avoid facing up that reality. They avoid the science because it gives them answers they are too scared to hear. They wallow around in mysticism instead, both ancient and modern, because it warms their comfort blankets.

But that response is PATHETIC!

Fantasy is indeed wonderful. Reality is indeed awesome.
Not knowing the difference between fantasy and reality is a hapless pastime for morons.

Rant ends

 

Last edited: May 16, 2022

Iamgien hsit si lal drnmoa

Sorry only pseudo-random - best I could do - tired after rant

 

crazy thought: maybe it evolved somehow, but i don't know how it would in only 6000 years. if only there was some way of finding out. i personally advocate stabbing around in the dark. guess we will never know.

edit: i think i just created a cybernetic process. i shall call it the 'futility loop'.

 

Last edited: May 16, 2022

Wow, I didn't know you're actually retarded