View Full Version : Unified Field Theorem


Kunga Dorji
12-31-10, 09:54 PM
On the surface maybe a little "off topic' but it goes to the underpinnings of
the scientific materialism that is blocking progress in the full understanding of ADHD:

Unified Field Theorem
Ever since Einstein, theoretical physicists have struggled to produce a unified field theorem that incorporates the properties of all the known forces in the world of physics.


They have all failed, and will all continue to fail, because the narrowness of their view causes them to systematically exclude from their calculations the most important field of them all- the field of conscious experience.
Too often consciousness is dismissed as a mere epiphenomenon of matter.
Like the air we breathe, or the water a fish swims in, consciousness, or attention, is virtually invisible to the unreflective person.


As yet we have not developed scientific instruments to measure it, but we forget that even the data our scientific instruments measure are totally meaningless before they are observed, and considered by a conscious being.


One only has to look at the chaos, and physical harms generated by Nazi Germany, or the conscious apprehension of relativity and the subsequent production of nuclear weapons to understand that the field of consciousness is capable of producing profound perturbations to the physical environment, and that any attempt to produce a unified field theorem that excludes it is doomed to failure.


Interestingly the higher levels of Eastern thought formally posit that the idea of conservation of mass energy is incomplete and that consciousness is the third element that is conserved in the existence of the universe.

EshkaronsEngine
12-31-10, 10:00 PM
From my limited studies of consciousness I have found that consciousness can be explained using the same equation that is used for the Mandelbrot Set.
http://i49.tinypic.com/2afiohd.jpg

Kunga Dorji
01-01-11, 01:58 AM
From my limited studies of consciousness I have found that consciousness can be explained using the same equation that is used for the Mandelbrot Set.
http://i49.tinypic.com/2afiohd.jpg

Interesting - can you provide any reference?
Fractals keep coming up everywhere at the moment.

meadd823
01-01-11, 02:16 AM
MandeldrotSet - Math world (http://mathworld.wolfram.com/MandelbrotSet.html)

EshkaronsEngine
01-01-11, 02:17 AM
Interesting - can you provide any reference?
Fractals keep coming up everywhere at the moment.


Look thru this thread I started. I can't say I fully understand it but for me the gist is there.

http://www.addforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=89277&highlight=consciousness+equation

meadd823
01-01-11, 02:24 AM
For my money consciousness is nothing more complicated than interaction - Interaction is where religion and science meet - the smallest particle and the wave become one and the largest concept can not escape thus interaction makes the distinction between existent and non-existent - for that which is immaterial is non-existent until it interacts.

Eastern philosophy meet Egyptian Hermetics -

Scooter77
01-01-11, 08:56 AM
Consciousness is a fascinating subject.
When you think that reality is only your perception in that moment, which simplifies potentiality into reality.
When you start to realise and consider all the potentials....

I'm with Barliman on this...our understanding is so incredibly limited, we are barely making sense of what we're experiencing in the moment, let alone what's outside our immediate perception.

Quantum physics is a fascinating area, please post more Barliman!

meadd823
01-04-11, 03:10 AM
With or for????

Huh??

Not taking sides - simply simplifying.

If perception is so complicated I can't perceive it why bother trying.

I'm with Barliman on this...our understanding is so incredibly limited, we are barely making sense of what we're experiencing in the moment, let alone what's outside our immediate perception.

It's still interaction - just the consideration of a state by a single human mind is still multi-level interaction.

I am saying the same thing differently. .. .

sarek
01-04-11, 04:12 AM
I think most of the confusion is caused by the fact there are different levels of looking at reality.
When you study a flower you can study its biology, its chemistry, even the subatomic processes within it. But it does not end there.
It is definitely possible to consider consciousness as an epiphenomenon of material interactions. But that does not exclude nor contradict the fact that there are other ways of looking at it.

I will be the first to admit that its hard to explain all the connections between all things. It is a level of understanding that almost becomes a feeling, which can not be adequately put into words.

Words to reality is like what Flatland is to our world. They only allow us to describe one slice at a time, they always miss a dimension of understanding.

bumpey
01-04-11, 11:46 AM
I went to a lecture on dark matter at a festival. found it was dark because they couldnt see it, ie dont have the technology yet.

everything is frequencys/energy, hearing tests test on certain frequencys, we cant hear dog wistles but they can. then theres radio waves, colour, didgital, wifi, bluetooth, electricity, taste, wind, sun etc

we can't see infra red be we know its theres with the right goggles.

EshkaronsEngine
01-04-11, 12:47 PM
I think CONSCIOUSNESS is the interplay between the nothing(maybe a blackhole) and the 500 trillion synapses firing in our brains. The binary tension that is created between the NOTHINGNESS and the CHEMICAL ENERGY create a potentiality which is our consciousness:cool:

Kunga Dorji
01-04-11, 06:33 PM
I think most of the confusion is caused by the fact there are different levels of looking at reality.

Words to reality is like what Flatland is to our world. They only allow us to describe one slice at a time, they always miss a dimension of understanding.

Nicely said.

Have you looked at Ken Wilbur's writings on Integral Thinking? You clearly operate as an integral thinker.

Kunga Dorji
01-04-11, 06:43 PM
With or for????

Huh??

Not taking sides - simply simplifying.

If perception is so complicated I can't perceive it why bother trying.



It might be better to say that perception is highly complicated and there is a very high risk of mis-perceiving.

I always find it rewarding when I succeed in stripping away another layer of confusion though- even if it turns out that there are more layers to go (as it invariably seems to).

I read a couple of very interesting articles by a naturopath, asserting that most of our stupid behaviour comes from acquiring cultural conventions that limit our accurate perception of the world.

http://raypeat.com/articles/articles/intuitive-knowledge.shtml

http://raypeat.com/articles/articles/authoritarians.shtml

I have a sort of ill formed, partially developed idea that we choose to incarnate as humans to fully explore the world and the interaction between mind and matter- and that sometimes we acquire limited beliefs that are helpful at one stage of our development, but need to be rooted out and abandoned later so that we may more fully experience reality. I have been doing a great deal of rooting out lately- much to the consternation of my parents, and other more conservative people around me.

sarek
01-04-11, 07:13 PM
Have you looked at Ken Wilbur's writings on Integral Thinking? You clearly operate as an integral thinker.


I have read some of his work but not extensively so. There are certainly analogies to be found with the way I approach reality.
From an early age I have been gathering widely diverse facts and elements of knowledge from a wide range of sources. Perhaps you can consider each separate source(or self contained complex of sources) to be the equivalent of a holon.
I have been doing that ever since and at some point there has been some kind of phase shift in my thinking when a wide range of interconnections between all these 'holons' became apparent.

It is an experience in which the dividing line between thinking and feeling almost becomes blurred.
The entire complex that used to be made up of all these separate bits of knowledge than becomes more than something I can reason about, but rather it evolves into a whole that can be perceived. The parts of the whole are no longer just parts in their own right but gain an additional quality because of the whole.

And so, in a way we are back to the title of the topic, which is a unified field theorem.

Scooter77
01-04-11, 07:18 PM
With or for????

Huh??

Not taking sides - simply simplifying.

If perception is so complicated I can't perceive it why bother trying.



It's still interaction - just the consideration of a state by a single human mind is still multi-level interaction.

I am saying the same thing differently. .. .

Eh?
I think I missed something...
I wasnt arguing anything you said - I just meant that I enjoy this topic...
Sorry if I came across differently....wasnt intended

bumpey
01-04-11, 08:34 PM
sub concious to concious thought, probably ego or past experience
soul/univeral energy to concious thought

EshkaronsEngine
01-05-11, 11:39 AM
My wonders. Let us lay down our swords, our prejudices and blame. Let us take up that fire we all know we have. Let us love each other with intensity. The gods have favored us and have given us of their holy fire. Let us breathe it all in. Let us not take anything for granted again. Don't u understand that I luv u and that that is CONSCIOUS LOVE. IT IS DIVINE AND PRICELESS. THROW AWAY UR FILTHY LUCRE. IT IS TIME ONCE AGAIN FOR US TO FELLOWSHIP