conciousness at supposedly non-living molecular level

[Rick]

WELL ,i am writing this on this the basis of an assumption,i dont know if that is true...if not please rectify me.
ASSUMPTION:"Whenever any particle is created from energy(E=MC^2)it has an anti-particle associated with it,this is universally true.what this means is that for universal balance stays only when these particle and antiparticle stay in the same state."
NOW FOR MY RANDOM THOUGHT!":OKAY if this theory is correct then say if i have a NON LIVING-particle that has an anti-particle associated with it which is say 6-light years away from the particle itself.
NOW,if the particle undergoes a change then the antiparticle MUST and WILL undergo a change SIMULTANEOUSLY,to keep the universal balance,BUT the antiparticle is 6-light year away from the particle...therefore it will take 6 years for light to reach the antiparticle to report the change,but it occurs only SIMULTANEOUSLY,so is there a chance that my original particle is concious!!!???since it is the only thing that has travelled faster than the velocity of light....any comments guys?

[James R]

Whenever any particle is created from energy(E=MC^2)it has an anti-particle associated with it...
What this means is that when you create matter from energy it usually happens in particle-antiparticle pairs. This is because the creation must conserve momentum as well as energy.

However, there is not necessarily any mysterious connection between the created particles after they have moved apart.

Also, there is much more matter in our universe than antimatter, so it is not true to say that every particle in the universe has a corresponding antiparticle.

[Mr Tulip]

I've just came here from http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=15987

Where you pulled James up.

he said

"Every fundamental partical has an antiparticle"

which is presumably different to

"Also, there is much more matter in our universe than antimatter, so it is not true to say that every particle in the universe has a corresponding antiparticle."

I think the crux of the matter lies on 'fundamental particle' not every particle in the Universe is a fundamental one. They're not all fundamental building blocks in the thing.

Hope that helps.

[spookz]

i read an article which i vaguely remember. it alluded to something (molecule? cell? atom?) having a memory of a previous state. this is not exactly consciouness.........

any ideas?

[river-wind]

if a particle is split, there are up-spin and down-spin peices. likewise, if a particle is create, an anti-particle is also created. If the spin of particle a is checked 5 hours after it is created, then particle b, half way across the universe, suddenly "receives" it's opposite spin. This cannot be explained by common physics, but it has been observed in the labrotory.

String theory deals with this problem by explaining the world in 10 dimensions- 4 spacial dientions which we live in (though we can only recognise 3 of them), and 2 groups of three dimentions that curled up into small balls during the big bang.

how can a dimention"curl up" in one book I read (forget which one, sorry), they talk about a bottom sheet for a bed. This sheet is too small for the matterss, and so while you may be able to stretch the sheet into place, it won't stay there. The elesticity force of the sheet will cause it to 'pop' off eventually; once it has, it will stay in a clump on the bed, because now, the sheet is in a lower energy state. similarly, the universe 'popped' into two 3 dimentional clumps and one four dimentional sheet, simply because those shapes were the lowest energy state for those dimentions to fall into.

it's really confusing I know, I'm not great at explaining it. the most confusing part is then 3-dimentional gravity in 4d space- it's really only a warp in the forth dimention, with some external force. just like Einstine's idea of gravity 'warping' 3d space requires an external (to the 3 dimentions) force to make it work- fun but mind boggling stuff.

[river-wind]

Originally posted by spookz
i read an article which i vaguely remember. it alluded to something (molecule? cell? atom?) having a memory of a previous state. this is not exactly consciouness.........

any ideas?

Steven Hawkings has been trying to prove that when an object falls into a black hole, the bit of radiation that is given off can tell you what the object originally was. It goes against standard theory about black holes, but it looks like it may be correct.

[sargentlard]

Originally posted by James R


Also, there is much more matter in our universe than antimatter, so it is not true to say that every particle in the universe has a corresponding antiparticle.



Everything thing i have read upon antimatter subject states the opposite of what you said......i am confused....it is believed that antimatter makes up 90% of the mass of the universe and the other 10% is the visible matter in the universe. That is why Galaxys are moving apart from each other faster and faster because of the antigravity created by the antimatter.

[sargentlard]

Originally posted by river-wind
if a particle is split, there are up-spin and down-spin peices. likewise, if a particle is create, an anti-particle is also created. If the spin of particle a is checked 5 hours after it is created, then particle b, half way across the universe, suddenly "receives" it's opposite spin. This cannot be explained by common physics, but it has been observed in the labrotory.




If i understood this correctly and what you posted is true then that would mean that the change in the spin had to travel way beyond faster than the speed of light. If the animatter particle recieves the opposite spin suddenly half way across the universe that would mean that it had to use some sort of method to travel there...maybe this goes into whole another realm of physics that is not yet known to man.....

[James R]

river-wind:

<i>Steven Hawkings has been trying to prove that when an object falls into a black hole, the bit of radiation that is given off can tell you what the object originally was.</i>

His name is <b>Stephen Hawking</b>.

The type of radiation you are talking about is called Hawking radiation. It is thought to exist, but it cannot tell you anything about what objects have fallen into the black hole. In fact, the apparent destruction of information which occurs is a problem for theories of black holes.


sargentlard:

<i>...it is believed that antimatter makes up 90% of the mass of the universe and the other 10% is the visible matter in the universe.</i>

You're confusing antimatter with dark matter. They are not the same thing.

<i>That is why Galaxys are moving apart from each other faster and faster because of the antigravity created by the antimatter.</i>

Antimatter has normal gravity. Antigravity is theorised to be created by something called dark energy, whose existence is not yet established beyond doubt.

<i>If i understood this correctly and what you posted is true then that would mean that the change in the spin had to travel way beyond faster than the speed of light.</i>

That is true. But nothing in relativity says that can't happen in the case of quantum entanglement (of which this is an example). No useful message can be transmitted using this apparent faster-than-light communication between particles.

[everneo]

Originally posted by spookz
i read an article which i vaguely remember. it alluded to something (molecule? cell? atom?) having a memory of a previous state. this is not exactly consciouness.........

any ideas?
think u r refering to shape-memory alloys which take predetermined shape in response to external stimulus like temperature. it is a material property..:)

[Blindman]

First off all. There was just about as much Antimatter as Matter in the early universe.. There was a tiny fraction more matter then antimatter. (Why??? unknown)..

Matter Antimatter relationship that’s been mentioned can/is mostly Matter Matter. When two things interact they are for ever linked. (BIG BANG. Every thing was in contact with every thing. So everything is linked. To change the path of a single photon will change the state of everything). Light speed has nothing to do with it... Hence String theory, in it many forms.. 10 Dimensions or is it 11..


Use of this entanglement has been exploited to produce the first teleporter.. (Made in my home state)... Teleports information in light.

Conscious!!!??? Is, must be linked to that.. We are all made up of inanimate (NON LIVING) particles. They (we) are all linked..

Conscious has many levels..One brain. Two half brains.. Two brains. Or even the mob. Just because we cant communicate or relate does not mean it does not exist.

Long live mother earth. May she have many children.

[Fafnir665]

Originally posted by James R
The type of radiation you are talking about is called Hawking radiation. It is thought to exist, but it cannot tell you anything about what objects have fallen into the black hole. In fact, the apparent destruction of information which occurs is a problem for theories of black holes.


true, but not entirely, hawking radiation is made from quanta of light. Hawking states that, when a photon hits the event horizon, its splits into quanta of energy, and part excapes, while the other gets sucked in

[river-wind]

Originally posted by James R
river-wind:

His name is <b>Stephen Hawking</b>.

oops. thanks


The type of radiation you are talking about is called Hawking radiation. It is thought to exist, but it cannot tell you anything about what objects have fallen into the black hole. In fact, the apparent destruction of information which occurs is a problem for theories of black holes.


I was under the impression that this was still open to debate, it hadn't been decided one way or the other?

[Fafnir665]

theres no proof... yet, there is an experiment planned to simulate a quantum singularity and see if they can produce hawking radiation

[sargentlard]

Originally posted by James R


sargentlard:

<i>...it is believed that antimatter makes up 90% of the mass of the universe and the other 10% is the visible matter in the universe.</i>

You're confusing antimatter with dark matter. They are not the same thing.

<i>That is why Galaxys are moving apart from each other faster and faster because of the antigravity created by the antimatter.</i>

Antimatter has normal gravity. Antigravity is theorised to be created by something called dark energy, whose existence is not yet established beyond doubt.

<i>If i understood this correctly and what you posted is true then that would mean that the change in the spin had to travel way beyond faster than the speed of light.</i>

That is true. But nothing in relativity says that can't happen in the case of quantum entanglement (of which this is an example). No useful message can be transmitted using this apparent faster-than-light communication between particles.




Well thank you for clearing that up....you're right i did confuse it for Dark Matter.

[QuantumManDaniel]

Your theory or "random thought" is basically true. However, the effect is not necessarily between a particle and its antiparticle. The effect you are describing, however, does occur and is known as quantum entanglement. It is one of the unsolved mysteries of spacetime when being described through the filters of relativity and quantum theory. The phenomenon is basically that two particles in space which have interacted continue to react according to one another even after the light travel distance between them has become so far that any change must occur before the amount of time needed. The theoretical explanation that I have to offer is this, and please someone shoot me down if I have turned out to be a blithering idiot.

According to quantum theory a particle only has a certain probability of being in a certain position in space at any given instant. This probability is governed by the schrodinger wave equation which demonstrates universal probability distribution. Now, a measurement of the particles precise location in space at any given instant effectively collapses this probability wave. This gives the effect that the particle is only in the position in which it was measured because it was measured there. Sound weird? It is. Now, this brings up an interesting question. Where was the particle before it was measured? The answer is somewhere within its field of probabilistic existence. This is relevant because the two objects which have interacted have effectively "measured" each other into conscious existence. The two particles which interacted will remain connected through the fields of force and energy spanning the universe. I believe that the consciousness exhibited here could be another one of those forces. My Email is Turamarth4@gmail.com if there are any confusions or questions.

[mackmack]

any science rule regardless of how fixed can be broken. einsteins e=mc^2 is one of those rules. one day someone will either find a way to break it or it will have variants of those rules. as far as this thread about anti-matter and particles being conscious. look around you it could be possible that this universe is just one neuron in someones brain!!!! just a thought. i came to this conclusion because the work that i'm doing kind of reminds me of the planets in our solar system. the way that gravity affects the planets is like how neurons have associaton with other neurons.

[spidergoat]

So, does quantum entanglement mean that information can be transmitted faster than light?

Consciousness is just information.

[TimeTraveler]

WELL ,i am writing this on this the basis of an assumption,i dont know if that is true...if not please rectify me.
ASSUMPTION:"Whenever any particle is created from energy(E=MC^2)it has an anti-particle associated with it,this is universally true.what this means is that for universal balance stays only when these particle and antiparticle stay in the same state."
NOW FOR MY RANDOM THOUGHT!":OKAY if this theory is correct then say if i have a NON LIVING-particle that has an anti-particle associated with it which is say 6-light years away from the particle itself.
NOW,if the particle undergoes a change then the antiparticle MUST and WILL undergo a change SIMULTANEOUSLY,to keep the universal balance,BUT the antiparticle is 6-light year away from the particle...therefore it will take 6 years for light to reach the antiparticle to report the change,but it occurs only SIMULTANEOUSLY,so is there a chance that my original particle is concious!!!???since it is the only thing that has travelled faster than the velocity of light....any comments guys?


That's exaftly what I was thinking with quantum entanglement. Your theory is pretty much exactly like mine, based on the same ideas.

The people at this forum however don't want to hear that particles may be conscious, so you wont get far and people will not be fair in how they treat your theory as many people here do not want atoms to be self aware or conscious.

[TimeTraveler]

So, does quantum entanglement mean that information can be transmitted faster than light?

Consciousness is just information.


Consciousness is NOT information, thats the whole point. The reason quantum entanglement works is because consciousness is NOT information.

My opinion is, consciousness IS the universe and is all that is real. The information is just junk information and is fake and exists only due to our ability to be conscious and aware of it.

You already know my theory on this, and you know the science backing it, and you know how I explained non-locality. So no, consciousness is what controls the universe and therefore it's real, and everything else is fake. This would mean that whatever controls the atoms in quantum entanglement to allow for pairs of particles to do that, is real, and thats why it can occur over unlimited distance, because it's more real than distance/timespace.

That's really the only theory which makes sense to explain non-locality and the non-existence of time/space limits for consciousness.

[mackmack]

atoms with a conscious? you have to prove that its conscious before anyone can take this theory seriously. but it can be possible that there is a central computer that instructions the atoms to do things that are considered intelligent.

[spidergoat]

I maintain consciousness is only representative of reality. It is perception, symbolic in nature, and it is the only universe we can be aware of, since we cannot perceive anything directly. Consciousness and information are identical. When we say we are conscious of an object, that means we percieve a message communicated from our senses to our brain, where an image of the object is formed.

[Zephyr]

Are we conscious, or do we just think we are?

[spidergoat]

Same thing.

[Zephyr]

A circular definition, but I'm guessing the best there is :p

[QuantumManDaniel]

The thing about it is that time traveler's theory is a close description of my theory. Consciousness can be described mathematically, physically, and logically as a force. Just as real as gravity, electricity, magnetism, strong, and weak forces. Actually, consciousness is more real, as time traveler stated. It is implied by my theory and his that consciousness is a universally encompassing force which causes one "reality" out of the infinite number present in the superspace condition described in superstring theory to be percieved. The force of consciousness actually fabricates a certain reality into a state of high probability; therefore, the reality can be observed.

This does seem a little odd and is a little hard to swallow, but we must remember that we are all scientific people here, and to deny the existence of some phenomenon without proof of its non-existence is just as foolish as supporting the existence of a phenomenon without proper evidence.

Any other thoughts?

[spidergoat]

Consciousness is always consciousness of something. That something is information. The "force" of consciousness is therefore informed action.

[mackmack]

"I maintain consciousness is only representative of reality. It is perception, symbolic in nature, and it is the only universe we can be aware of, since we cannot perceive anything directly. Consciousness and information are identical. When we say we are conscious of an object, that means we percieve a message communicated from our senses to our brain, where an image of the object is formed."--spider

actually his using the old recursion thing where he tries to ask the question: which cam first the chicken or the egg.

humans are conscious not becuase of reality but because of testing out reality. a conscious is something that isn't defined but that has a recuring pattern. if something is random and it appears to be conscious then if you test it out a second or third time it won't happen. on the other hand if you test out if a human being is conscious you will find that there is a recurring pattern.

[TimeTraveler]

"I maintain consciousness is only representative of reality. It is perception, symbolic in nature, and it is the only universe we can be aware of, since we cannot perceive anything directly. Consciousness and information are identical. When we say we are conscious of an object, that means we percieve a message communicated from our senses to our brain, where an image of the object is formed."--spider

actually his using the old recursion thing where he tries to ask the question: which cam first the chicken or the egg.

humans are conscious not becuase of reality but because of testing out reality. a conscious is something that isn't defined but that has a recuring pattern. if something is random and it appears to be conscious then if you test it out a second or third time it won't happen. on the other hand if you test out if a human being is conscious you will find that there is a recurring pattern.

Thats because existence is order/reality/awareness. There is no such thing as random, random does not exist. If random exists, what prevents us from coming up with the hypothesis that R = God?

My God Hypothesis.

1+1 = R
but 5 + 5 = R
because everything + everything = R.

R = all possible numbers, answers, problems, solutions, ideas, questions, thoughts, beliefs, energy types, forces, and R increases exponentially.

Do you see? That's proof there is no such thing as random/R, and so the material universe must be O. O = Order.

In a universe of order, it's all cause and effect, with G being God, the first Order in the sequence of cause and effect. Does that explain? But before there was order there was awareness to generate that order, as order is a result of awareness. The fact that atoms spin in a certain way shows that atoms have a level of awareness with other atoms, this is not the same thing as life, but it shows at least that the atom itself is not randomly spinning around, it's following "laws", and all "laws" exist because of awareness.

You cannot have any laws, math or universal formulas, if there is no awareness to support the existence of that law. Basically the universe is self aware, just like your body is. You don't think so?

[TimeTraveler]

And if any mathematician types are here, we should start a forum to discuss potential equations for a God hypothesis. I actually think you can prove the existence of God in an equation. The problem is, that same equation which proves the existence of God, could be used to claim the universe is fake.

So it depends on who reads it and how they interpet it. But do you see how you can easily come to the conclusion that existence is the most real thing in the universe? Of course God would be most real, because a fake God does not make any sense. A fake universe does not make any sense either but I suppose some people do prefer that thinking.

In the fake universe, all realities are fake, as nothing is real, and nothing actually exists. Everything is being fake means existence itself would be fake. I personally think existence is real, more real than non-existence. And thats the basis of my hypothesis.

I'd rather a math person translate it into math language, but my brief version above at least explains the basics.

[TimeTraveler]

Consciousness is always consciousness of something. That something is information. The "force" of consciousness is therefore informed action.

What if the self awareness force existed before there was any matter to play with? So what if that force banged matter into existence, and then created eyes so it could better control it by seeing it, and created hands too so it could touch it?

Now you could believe this is all a mechanical process, but in order to believe that you have to somehow convince yourself that humans and other lifeforms are popping out of the assembly line. I think that idea makes no sense because of the unlimited efficiency that the universe seems to have.

In order to have this insane amount of efficiency, it would take something more real than this here. Basically, what holds all of this together if not consciousness? Why should any of this hold together? What keeps this universe from collapsing into a state of non-existence? It seems awareness does not collapse. So you see even if the universe was the big bang in reverse and collapsing, it still would not cease to exist, it would just shrink forever, getting smaller and tighter until it's a singularity, but it would still exist which leads me to believe awareness might actually decrease/increase with size. This might be why quantum particles can do things that seem impossible on our level of size, but it seems time travel is possible at the particle level, it seems theres actually more freedom in the quantum world. I don't really understand that fully myself, I'm trying to.

Think of it this way, if the universe itself were the size of a pinpoint, or even the size of 10 atoms, and thats all that existed, those 10 atoms if they developed a self awareness, would be so ridicuously aware that it would be unimaginable by our standards, because everything that exists would be smaller, but the awareness wouldnt be smaller. Let's say these self aware 10 atoms DECIDED to spin?

Does this cause a paradigm shift?

Now take another example, lets say you have a lifeform thats the size of a galaxy, you'd think it would be more aware right? That lifeform would actually be a tool for the atoms/universe to become aware.

Quantum entanglement, atoms can be in multiple places at once. Conciousness can move faster than light. The proof is you can put text in a photon, and quantum entangle it accross the universe.

Now if WE can cause this to happen, and we are just atoms ourselves, and only solid due to electro-magnetism, it should cause another paradigm shift.

The more you learn about modern quantum physics the more paradigm shifts you get, and quantum philosophy is very interesting to me because people are ignoring it or just don't understand what all this stuff could mean.



Are life and consciousness connected to the funda-mental level of reality?


Quantum Mind 2007
July 16-20, 2007
Salzburg, Austria
Toward a Science of Consciousness 2007,
July 23-26, 2007
Budapest, Hungary

Toward a Science of Consciousness 2006

April 4-8, 2006,

Tucson, Arizona

Orch OR on WikiPedia

Penrose Review in WIRED

Consciousness and a Theory of Everything - Roger Penrose

Hackery/Quackery

in Scientific American

Breakthrough Study

on EEG of Meditation

Debate with Christof Koch

in Sci-Con Review

"Quantum approaches to consciousness"

by Harald Atmanspacher in The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

Consciousness

(The DVD Box Set)

Changes at

The Center for Consciousness Studies

What the bleep?






Consciousness defines our existence and reality, but the mechanism by which

the brain generates thoughts and feelings remains unknown.

Most explanations portray the brain as a computer, with nerve cells ("neurons") and their synaptic connections acting as simple switches. However computation alone cannot explain why we have feelings and awareness, an "inner life."

We also don't know if our conscious perceptions accurately portray the external world. At its base, the universe follows the seemingly bizarre and paradoxical laws of quantum mechanics, with particles being in multiple places simultaneously, connected over distance, and with time not existing. But the “classical” world we perceive is definite, with a flow of time. The boundary or edge (quantum state reduction, or ‘collapse of the wave function”) between the quantum and classical worlds somehow involves consciousness.

I spent twenty years studying how computer-like structures called microtubules inside neurons and other cells could process information related to consciousness. But when I read The emperor’s new mind by Sir Roger Penrose in 1991 I realized that consciousness may be a specific process on the edge between the quantum and classical worlds. Roger and I teamed up to develop a theory of consciousness based on quantum computation in microtubules within neurons. Roger’s mechanism for an objective threshold for quantum state reduction connects us to the most basic, “funda-mental” level of the universe at the Planck scale, and is called objective reduction (OR). Our suggestion for biological feedback to microtubule quantum states is orchestration (Orch), hence our model is called orchestrated objective reduction, Orch OR.


"Mind and intelligence are woven into the fabric of the universe" - Freeman Dyson

In recent years I have concluded that such a connection to the basic proto-conscious level of reality where Platonic values are embedded is strikingly similar to Buddhist concepts, and may account for spirituality.

http://www.quantumconsciousness.org/

http://www.qpt.org.uk/index3.php?id=4&id2=32

[mackmack]

i agree with timetraveler. its not about what reality is but that our reality is governed by laws and patterns. if you study statistics at universities they will tell you all the probability of things and these probabilities dont happen by chance. those things are created by someone or something or a group of things that are intelligent.

i believe that the human race is created just like cars. there is not one person responsible for our existence. there are lots of people involved in the creation of a car--the people who designed the cars, the manufacturers, the people who designed the gps systems, the people who designed the wheels and so forth.

this theory of mine that god exist doesn't mean that i support any religion out there. i just said taht there is a god. But for scientists to come out publicly and say that life is random is just wrong.

[QuantumManDaniel]

I understand the skepticism that is being generated here, but I think it is because there is a slight mix up. I am not saying that life is random by any means. The consciousness I described may very well be the theoretically proven existence of a "divine" existence of some sort ( I actually believe that it most likely is). However, the juxtuposition of religious and scientific dialougue is a recipe for disaster. Science has its place just as religious or spiritual conviction has its place. To mix the two openly is to betray both studies.

That being said:

consciousness is NOT just a collaboration of information. And life is NOT random. The happenings of the universe are governed by a wave function which measures the probability of an occurence in multi-dimensional spacetime. But, what I failed to say is that these probable "realities" do not simply occur randomly. Rather, they interact in much the same way that a wave does. The wave of probability for these "realities" exhibits properties of wave interference. This suggests that we cannot simply consider one "reality" we must consider an infinite number of realities occuring simultaneously in order to get a picture of REALITY. That does not make the observed universe any less real. In fact, it makes the observed universe ultimately real. Someone adequately put that consciousness is the condition of testing reality. It is. In the phenomenon of quantum entanglement, any two particles have to have a net spin of zero. By setting the net spin to zero, the scientists then record the probability of the spins of each particle. The probability represents both spin and position. The cool thing is that the particles aren't just executing one of those realities, but are executing every possible reality they can embody. Once a scientist measures (observes) a certain spin for one of the particles, the other one is INSTANTANEOUSLY set. The same is true for the observed universe. Only after observation is reality really "real."

On a side note: I AM a very mathematical person, but I ask that you think twice before seeking the God Equation. To reduce the divine down to a series of finite symbols and numbers in an equation seems like blasphemy to me. Not even infinity is totally infinite. Therefore, any mathematical expression used to describe a divine entity would invariably leave something out.

[nicholas1M7]

I maintain consciousness is only representative of reality. It is perception, symbolic in nature, and it is the only universe we can be aware of, since we cannot perceive anything directly. Consciousness and information are identical. When we say we are conscious of an object, that means we percieve a message communicated from our senses to our brain, where an image of the object is formed.

To quote a certain character in a certain movie with the first letter, N, aka the O, "whoa".

[heliocentric]

I maintain consciousness is only representative of reality. It is perception, symbolic in nature, and it is the only universe we can be aware of, since we cannot perceive anything directly. Consciousness and information are identical. When we say we are conscious of an object, that means we percieve a message communicated from our senses to our brain, where an image of the object is formed.

Yes ive come to the same conclusion over the years, consciousness can be cimply explained as information exhange.
Going by this interpretation everything is of course conscious of everything else as everything has the ability to receive/transmit information. The real question is, with small particles how exactly does this process work?

[QuantumManDaniel]

Through the constant exchange of force particles (such as photons, gravitons, etc.) by particles of matter via. the field of consciousness.

[heliocentric]

I maintain consciousness is only representative of reality. It is perception, symbolic in nature, and it is the only universe we can be aware of, since we cannot perceive anything directly. Consciousness and information are identical. When we say we are conscious of an object, that means we percieve a message communicated from our senses to our brain, where an image of the object is formed.

Id generally have to agree, consciousness as id see it is simply the ability to recieve and transmit information.
Rather than a force i think its a simply a process.
The problem is we dont understand how the process works on the quantum level.

As a thought experiment though, if we 'could' harness the quantum process and somehow make it appliable on the macro scale then we could essentially exchange information faster than light.
So fast infact that you could answer a question at the same point in time as being asked it. From our perspective time would no long exist, wed simply experience all possible questions and all possible variables of answers at once.
Im pretty sure the human mind already has the capability already to converse on this level funnily enough. The problem here though is that the brain generally doesnt seem able to sustain these states of mind for long periods of time.

[heliocentric]

Through the constant exchange of force particles (such as photons, gravitons, etc.) by particles of matter via. the field of consciousness.
Im not sure that really explains anything, i think thats simply replacing the original set of questions with another set of questions.
If the process of information exhange is mediated by a consciousness field then we need to understand how that works instead.

[Sci-Phenomena]

Who here has seen the movie A.I. ? That movie blew my mind. It made me realize that humans are merely bio-robots.... it's almost sad, and yet, at the same time it feels exciting to think that we may one day have robots which exceed human ability... too many science fiction films? Perhaps...

[Billy T]

...It made me realize that humans are merely bio-robots..... Perhaps, possibly even probably, but not necessarily so.
Perhaps, humans and some of the more advanced animals are hybrids of your Bio-Robots and an informational process that is occurring in the brain. If our "psychological selves" are only an informational process running in the world's most advanced parallel processor (way beyond any parallel processor man has yet even dreamed of) then it is possible that genuine free will may exist. (Logic of programs running in a computer does not depend upon the physical laws by which that computer operates; and it is the logic of the program that is important, not whether it is executed by pneumatic or electric circuits.)

I have posed long paper on this "We are an 'information process,' not governed by physical laws." POV. For that post go to:
http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=1294496&postcount=52
And begin to read at the bold text" Genuine Free Will is Possible

[Cyperium]

WELL ,i am writing this on this the basis of an assumption,i dont know if that is true...if not please rectify me.
ASSUMPTION:"Whenever any particle is created from energy(E=MC^2)it has an anti-particle associated with it,this is universally true.what this means is that for universal balance stays only when these particle and antiparticle stay in the same state."
NOW FOR MY RANDOM THOUGHT!":OKAY if this theory is correct then say if i have a NON LIVING-particle that has an anti-particle associated with it which is say 6-light years away from the particle itself.
NOW,if the particle undergoes a change then the antiparticle MUST and WILL undergo a change SIMULTANEOUSLY,to keep the universal balance,BUT the antiparticle is 6-light year away from the particle...therefore it will take 6 years for light to reach the antiparticle to report the change,but it occurs only SIMULTANEOUSLY,so is there a chance that my original particle is concious!!!???since it is the only thing that has travelled faster than the velocity of light....any comments guys?From what I've heard the particles aren't really seperated, even if it seems so to us, actually every electron in the universe is the same electron. I don't know where I heard it, I think it was a science show, but I think you can find sources on the net if you look it up. I'll look it up too when I find more time.

[Rick]

omg, when did i start this thread? in like 1920 something ;) ?

[mackmack]

this universe is contained in an atom in another universe. encapsulation of matter. of course this is just a theory

[EmptyForceOfChi]

yinyang,

(sorry for bieng too scientific for your tiny brains)

peace.

[Roman]

What does anti-light look like?

[EmptyForceOfChi]

i dont know i cant see it.

:)


peace.

[QuantumManDaniel]

Heliocentric has restated what I essentially tried to say. Consciousness IS only a representation of the real world because no one's experience of reality is the same (in accordance with the statements of heliocentric). I simply maintain that conscious force theory is simply the computational method of finding the quantum aspects of conscious thought.

peace out

[TimeTraveler]

From what I've heard the particles aren't really seperated, even if it seems so to us, actually every electron in the universe is the same electron. I don't know where I heard it, I think it was a science show, but I think you can find sources on the net if you look it up. I'll look it up too when I find more time.

every electron in the universe is the same electron

That's the perfect description of quantum entanglement.

[TimeTraveler]

What does anti-light look like?

Darkness. Meaning you can't see it.