Skip to comments.Scientists Claim That Quantum Theory Proves Consciousness Moves To Another Universe At Death
Posted on 01/17/2014 7:43:11 PM PST by DaveMSmith
click here to read article
So Scientology is RIGHT! I KNEW IT
Science doesn’t explain consciousness. Quantum mechanics is the only science that even touches it. Nothing exists without a conscious observer. Existence of the universe would require a conscious entity to bring it into existence.
Well I’m not going to believe it until Bill O’Reilly writes a book about it!
Well I’m not going to believe it until Bill O’Reilly writes a book about it!
by Lothar Schäfer
That the basis of the material world is non-material is a transcription of the fact that the properties of things are determined by quantum waves, - probability amplitudes which carry numerical relations, but are devoid of mass and energy. As a consequence of the wave-like aspects of reality, atoms do not have any shape - a solid outline in space - but the things do, which they form; and the constituents of matter, the elementary particles, are not in the same sense real as the real things that they constitute.
Rather, left to themselves they exist in a world of possibilities, between the idea of a thing and a real thing, as Heisenberg wrote, in superpositions of quantum states, in which a definite place in space, for example, is not an intrinsic attribute. That is, when such a particle is not observed it is, in particular, nowhere.
In the quantum phenomena we have discovered that reality is different than we thought. Visible order and permanence are based on chaos and transitory entities. Mental principles - numerical relations, mathematical forms, principles of symmetry - are the foundations of order in the universe, whose mind-like properties are further established by the fact that changes in information can act, without any direct physical intervention, as causal agents in observable changes in quantum states. Prior to the discovery of these phenomena information-driven reactions were a prerogative of mind. The universe, Eddington wrote, is of the nature of a thought. The stuff of the world is mind-stuff.
Mind-stuff, in a part of reality behind the mechanistic foreground of the world of space-time energy sensibility, as Sherrington called it, is not restricted to Einstein locality. The existence of non-local physical effects - faster than light phenomena - has now been well established by quantum coherence-type experiments like those related to Bells Theorem. If the universe is non-local, something that happens at this moment in its depths may have an instantaneous effect a long distance away, for example right here and right now. By every molecule in our body we are tuned to the mind-stuff of the universe.
In this way the quantum phenomena have forced the opening of a universe that Newtons mechanism once blinded and closed. Unintended by its creator, Newtons mechanics defined a machine, without any life or room for human values, the Parmenidian One, forever unchanging and predictable, eternal matter ruled by eternal laws, as Sheldrake wrote. In contrast, the quantum phenomena have revealed that the world of mechanism is just the cortex of a deeper and wider, transcendent, reality. The future of the universe is open, because it is unpredictable. Its present is open, because it is subject to non-local influences that are beyond our control. Cracks have formed in the solidity of the material world from which emanations of a different type of reality seep in. In the diffraction experiments of material particles, a window has opened to the world of Platonic ideas.
That the universe should be mind-like and not communicate with the human mind - the one organ to which it is akin - is not very likely. In fact, one of the most fascinating faculties of the human mind is its ability to be inspired by unknown sources - as though it were sensitive to signals of a mysterious origin. It is at this point that the pieces of the puzzle fall into place. Ever since the discovery of Humes paradox - the principles that we use to establish scientific knowledge cannot establish themselves - science has had an illegitimate basis. Hume was right: in every external event we observe conjunction, but infer connection. Thus, causality is not a principle of nature but a habit of the human mind. At the same time, Hume was not right in postulating that there is no single experience of causality. Because, when the self-conscious mind itself is directly involved in a causal link, for example when its associated body takes part in a collision, or when the mind by its own free will is the cause of some action, then there is a direct experience of, and no doubt that, causal connections exist. When this modification of the paradox is coupled with the quantum base, a large number of pressing problems find their delightful solutions.
Like the nature of reality, the nature of knowledge is counter-intuitive, and not at all like the automatic confidence that we have in sensations of this phenomenon. The basis of knowledge is threefold. The premises are experience of reality, employment of reason, and reliance on certain non-rational, non-empirical principles, such as the Assumptions of identity, factuality, permanence, Causality, and induction. Where do these principles come from? Neither from an experience of external phenomena, nor from a process of reasoning, but from a system program of the self-conscious mind. By being an extension of the mind-like background of nature and partaking of its order, mind gives the epistemic principles - those used in deriving knowledge - certainty. Since they are not anchored in the world of space-time and mass-energy but are valid nevertheless, they seem to derive from a higher order and transcendent part of physical reality. They are, it can be assumed, messengers of the mind-like order of reality.
In the same way, moral principles. Traditional societies based their social order on myths and religious explanations. By assuming a purpose in the world, they told people why things are the way they are, and why they should act the way they were supposed to act. In the animist ontogenies values and knowledge derived from a single source, and life had meaning in an animist covenant as Monod called it. By destroying the ontological base of the animist explanations, - their astronomy, physics, and chemistry, - science also destroyed the foundations of their values.
In this process Monod saw the origin of the contemporary sickness in culture, das Unbehagen in der Kultur: on the one hand science is the basis for our power and survival; on the other, it has broken the animist covenant, rendered life meaningless in the process, and disconnected the world of values from the world of facts.
The sickness of spirit and the concomitant erosion of moral standards are the great danger for the future of mankind, already apparent in the public adoration of violence and debased behavior. At its roots is the unsolved question, on whose authority are the moral principles to be based now that the authority of the animist myths has been found lacking?
For those who are willing to listen, the answer is: on the authority of mind. In the same way that the self-conscious mind grants certainty to the epistemic principles, it invests authority in the moral principles. Like the former, the moral principles are non-empirical and non-rational, - not derived by a process of logic nor verified by experience - messengers from a higher reality beyond the front of mass-energy sensibility.
Epistemic principles give us a sense of what is true and false; moral principles, of what is right and wrong. The former establish the certainty of identity, permanence, factuality, causality; the latter, of responsibility, morality, honesty. By the same process that allows us to accept, without possible verification, the epistemic principles, we can also accept the authority of the moral principles. Violation of any one of them will put us in contrast to the nature of reality. If the nature of the universe is mind-like, it must be assumed to have a spiritual order as well as a physical order. As the epistemic principles are expressions of physical order, the ethical principles are expressions of the spiritual order of physical reality. By being an extension of the transcendent part of the nature and partaking of its order, mind establishes the authority of the ethical principles.
The challenge of reality and the ability to explore it are wonderful gifts to mankind. Understanding reality requires refinement of thought. That is, it has to do with culture. It requires an effort, is not afforded by automatic, intuitive reflex. Making sense of the world takes the response to a challenge, not the complacency of common sense. It is one and the same as striving for the moral life. An important part of it is the need to become aware of the specific character of human nature, to recognize the human mystery as Eccles called it: the mystery of how mind and body interact, how self-conscious human beings with values emerged in an evolutionary process supposedly based on blind chance and brutality. The evidence is growing that there is more to human nature than the laws of physics or chemistry, more to the process of evolution than blind chance and brutality; that evolution is more than, as Monod wrote, a giant lottery, and human beings live at the boundary of an alien world that is deaf to our music and indifferent to our hopes and suffering and crimes.
The barbaric view of reality is mechanistic. It is the easy view of classical science and of common sense. In epistemology mechanism is naive realism, the view that all knowledge is based on unquestionable facts, on apodictically verified truths. In physics mechanism is the view that the universe is clockwork, closed, and entirely predictable on the basis of unchanging laws. In biology, mechanism is the view that all aspects of life, its evolution, our feelings and values, are ultimately explicable in terms of the laws of physics and chemistry. In our legal system, mechanism is the view that the assumption of precise procedural technicalities constitutes perfect justice. In our political system, mechanism is the view that the assertion of finely formulated personal rights constitutes the ideal democracy. In our public administration, it is the view that responsible service manifests itself by the enforcement of finely split bureaucratic regulations. All of these attitudes are the attitudes of barbarians.
The quantum phenomena have taught us that, without naive realism, knowledge is possible. They have taught us that, without naive animism an ethic of knowledge, as Monod has called it, and a life with values are possible. Principles exist which are valid even though they cannot be verified. The discovery of the quantum phenomena has established a new covenant - between the human mind and the mind-like background of the universe - one that provides a home again to the homeless and meaning to the meaningless life. Whether or not the human mind is separate of the brain, as Sherrington and Eccles thought, I do not know. But I do not doubt that it is human only in some parts, and in others shares in the mind-like background of the universe. It is now possible to believe that the mind is the realization of universal potentia, a manifestation of the essence of the universe. Therefore, the only good life is in harmony with the nature of reality.
How about when we sleep or are under anesthesia?
I had considered that our bodies and life timeline are really the intersection of our mufti-dimensional selves with a 4 dimensional perceivable universe. If the universe is 22 dimensions or whatever, and we are only able to perceive 4, then our existence could very well extend beyond the 4 perceivable dimensions...
Thus, in the same way in which dead atoms can form living organisms and stupid molecules can form intelligent brains, the metaphysical can engender the physical.
Without the employment of advanced mathematics, the book uses the phenomena of Quantum Reality to provide a clear and generally understandable description of the concepts of Quantum Mechanics and its consequences for our views of human nature."
Lothar Schäfer is the Edgar Wertheim Distinguished Professor of Physical Chemistry at the University of Arkansas in Fayetteville. He received his Ph.D. (in Chemistry) from the University of Munich in 1965, and is the recipient of numerous awards for his scientific work. His current research interests include topics in Applied Quantum Chemistry and Molecular Structural Studies by Electron Diffraction.
In a review of Schäfers book, Professor Quentin Smith, Department of Philosophy, Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, Michigan, writes:
Schäfers book is an integrative approach to Modern Science and Religion that aims to show how some traditional religious and philosophical notions can be understood or redefined in terms of modern science. The scientific explanations are reliable and the scientific interpretations of religious ideas are interesting and should be taken seriously and respectfully by even the most sober-minded adherents of the scientific world-view. Rather than science being opposed or subordinated to religion, religious views are refashioned in terms of currently accepted scientific theories. Most of the arguments of the book are based on conclusions drawn from the phenomena of quantum reality and it is one of the clearest introductory explanations of quantum mechanics on the market. Schäfers book is written in a lively and accessible style that will appeal to the general reader. I really enjoyed reading this book...."
There are many many instances of Near Death Experiences that confirm observation of the spiritual world.
I suspect that there are a lot of closeted Christians or at least believers in a higher power among astrophysicists. People who spend that much time thinking that deeply about the nature of the universe must reach a point where they run out of conclusions.
I know that for me, my love and interest in science only deepens my faith.
The open atheists among them like Steven Hawking tend to be angry and I think its because they’re frustrated that they can’t disprove God but can’t accept God either.
That’s only one school of quantum mechanics [Copenhagen Interpretation.] There are others.
LOL You had to ruin the fantasy, didn't you?
Sounds like ye old belief in reincarnation espoused by many eastern religions.
Ping. Looks like modern man is starting to discover what the Buddha knew 2600 years ago.
Perhaps they need to read some yogacharin abhidharma to completely catch up.
To move on in this life we have to answer the existential question "Are we a transcendent being on not"
Do any of them explain consciousness?
What is it which dreams? What is it which says”I” am going to do x? The soul needs a living body with which to function fully. It does not need it to exist.
If you cast your left eye into Hell so the rest of you can go to Heaven, it does weird things to your state vector.
“Nothing exists without a conscious observer.”
If a tree falls in the forest and no one is there....
No. You are therefore you think.
No, and the Copenhagen School doesn’t really, either. It accepts its existence as axiomatic without attempting to explain it.
I've been dead .... I saw the bright light, felt the warmth and safety of where I was ..... saw myself, meaning my physical body where it was .... and then I was brought back.
Yes there is an afterlife. I believe it's Heaven. There's a reason I felt warm and safe.
Were posts 4 & 5 sent from 2 different universes??
Scientists Claim That Quantum Theory Proves Kim Kardashian`s Consciousness Moves To Another Mr. Universe At Boredom.
For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.
I’ll take good over bad for eternity please.
Thank You Jesus.
Or that confirm that your brain is running out of Oxygen.
I have spoken with several people who describe a warm and comforting feeling.
Two have described Hell. One was a member of a well known cult and the other a total atheist.
Too many words, ET.
I hear you brother!
Yes, and apparently that dumbass Bill O'Reilly is in both of them.
If one meditates on a “clear” day, they can sometimes see it.
IMO, yes, some element of each of us continues beyond this world. But the very concept of “each of us” is not quite valid when you look beyond.
I, you, all we perceive is the Universe and the Universe is us. Eternal, harmonious and made one by some unexplainable force.
Our perception of time, space, material and self appears to be like a shell that we can only momentarily peek from.
How, why, or “who” made it this way seems to be something beyond explanation in this material world IMO but I applaud these guys for trying.
I think we'd better first answer the question are we singular or am I plural.
You can get the same experience with hallucinogens. At least that is what I am told. :-)
No. You remember you think you are.
We are the world
We are the children...
(Sorry I couldn't help it)
It's from one of those new 3D printers....with two dimensions locked into the paper...and the third connected to one of the other dimensions via a time machine.
They were able to do it by locking into the subconscious of the recently departed Loretta Fuddy...Hawaii's health director who has seen the original.
I think Stephen Hawking has plenty else to be 'angry' about than metaphysical sophistry.
If you answer a Mayfly then you are very perceptive: you realize that in time and space, time is relative and the short life of the Mayfly could be mysteriously longer than the life of the mighty Cyprus.
If you answered a Cyprus then you are unimaginative, but correct.
-- The Profit by Kehlog Albran
If you remember with what does what remember?
Personally verified on many occasions between 1969 and 1974.
Thanks for the ping, Bro!
I can accept that in another universe 0bama really is an American and has a valid BC. But in this one he’s the evil Mr. Spock. Without the cool beard and stache.
And he answered:
Just as the passage of time will answer the question of
Age, the passage of Age will answer the question of Wisdom.
Man has always sought to discover the mystery of Wisdom, just as he seeks to discover the mystery of a rainstorm, or why a potato is not expensive.
The smallest insect possesses profound Wisdom.
That small insect knows the secrets of the earth that man shall never know.
A fish knows the secrets of the sea that man shall never know.
A bird knows the secrets of the sky that man shall never know.
And what is that secret, Master, the man asked.
It is this:
All of the creatures of earth must use their imagination.
For it is imagination that makes a piece of bread taste like steak, water taste like wine, and worms taste like chicken.
But what about the secret of the bird, the man insisted.
What bird? the Master inquired. -- The Profit, by Kehlog Albran
And he answered:
It is that which gives a beast of burden its reason for existence.
It is that which men in former times had to bear upon their backs.
It is that which has caused nations to build by-ways from City to City upon which carts and coaches pass, and alongside which inns have come to be built to stave off Hunger, Thirst and Weariness.
It is that which has caused great fleets of ships to ply the Seven Seas wherever the wind blows.
And that is Fate? said the priest.
Fate... I thought you said Freight, responded the Master.
That's all right, said the priest. I wanted to know what Freight was too.
-- The Profit, by Kehlog Albran
Science researches. Scientism makes claims.
Kim Kardashian has consciousness? When did this happen?