Does time exist outside of consciousness?

[Olga]

Ok. I would be more inclined to distinguish between models, comparing their explanatory power and predictive power.

Lets embrace unique perspectives instead.


you said

"It's interesting to go further, to understand the relationship between matter and consciousness."

Are you familiar with Thomas Campbell work?

He is "out of body" guy.

He wrote "My Big Toe" books.

I think his approach is similar to yours.

He suggests various matter and consciousness relationships.

Healing etc

What relationship between matter and consciousness you would want to discuss.

I have to be honest, I am quite sceptical but I am willing to entertain those possibilities.

So lets dive in.

You leed.

Я не слышала про этого парня. Но судя по Вашему описанию, это похоже на восточные практики, когда Я выносится за пределы тела, и работает только бессознательная часть мозга.

 

[Olga]

Can you stick to one point at a time? We are talking about red shift and the CMBR.
Before you move onto yet another point, out line exactly why you disagree with Hubble law, expanding universe and the CMBR.

Потому что они не объясняют связь материи с пространством. Как они связаны между собой в этой модели?

 

[Pinball1970]

Потому что они не объясняют связь материи с пространством. Как они связаны между собой в этой модели?

Course it does, galaxies are measured and tell us they are receding via red shift. The space in-between us in the milky way and those distant galaxies are increasing.

 

[Olga]

Course it does, galaxies are measured and tell us the receding via red shift. The space in-between us in the milky way and those distant galaxies are increasing.

Можно другой вариант попробовать рассмотреть. Если в межгалактическом пространстве много электронов, то они разворачиваются, выстраиваются в струны, и это выглядит как реликтовые фотоны.

 

[Pinball1970]

Можно другой вариант попробовать рассмотреть. Если в межгалактическом пространстве много электронов, то они разворачиваются, выстраиваются в струны, и это выглядит как реликтовые фотоны.

No Cosmologists think that, why do you? Why are you dismissing Cosmology?

 

[Olga]

No Cosmologists think that, why do you? Why are you dismissing Cosmology?

Мне не нравится фраза: "наука этого не знает". Всё должно объясняться непротиворечиво, без лишних сущностей.

 

[Pinball1970]

Мне не нравится фраза: "наука этого не знает". Всё должно объясняться непротиворечиво, без лишних сущностей.

But this is one of the things that was worked out 100 years ago.
The Universe is expanding, it was strange to Einstein at the time but like I said, that was 100 years ago.
There is no evidence that has come to light that contradicts this and there is no debate in the scientific community.
They debate other more pressing matters.

 

[Olga]

But this is one of the things that was worked out 100 years ago.
The Universe is expanding, it was strange to Einstein at the time but like I said, that was 100 years ago.
There is no evidence that has come to light that contradicts this and there is no debate in the scientific community.
They debate other more pressing matters.

Ну и что? Когда то считали, что Земля плоская, и это тоже не вызывало вопросов у большинства. Вселенная - это не английский парламент. Ей не нужны множества законов, непонятных сущностей, сил, полей, и прочих нагромождений. Достаточно одного фундаментального закона, из которого можно вывести все остальные. Здание нужно начинать строить с фундамента, а не наоборот.

 

[(Q)]

My observation is that most people have some degree of intuition. Some don't have it, or it's not developed. These are the so-called Doubting Thomases, who need to "touch" something to understand. Or to realize.

Intuition is often wrong because it's no more valid than a guess. "Doubting Thomases" are called skeptics who question things.

 

[(Q)]

I didn't ignore your answer. I countered it.

No, you dismissed it out of hand like you always do.

 

[(Q)]

Yes, I believe in God. Because I know.

What do you know? Gods have never been shown to exist, therefore you must be lying or delusional.

 

[(Q)]

Grzegorz, the spatial network between galaxies is not as dense as inside galaxies, and even denser inside massive objects. The waves appear more stretched out.

You really have no idea what you're talking about. Lol.

 

[Pinball1970]

Ну и что? Когда то считали, что Земля плоская, и это тоже не вызывало вопросов у большинства. Вселенная - это не английский парламент. Ей не нужны множества законов, непонятных сущностей, сил, полей, и прочих нагромождений. Достаточно одного фундаментального закона, из которого можно вывести все остальные. Здание нужно начинать строить с фундамента, а не наоборот.

"So what? At one time it was believed that the Earth was flat, and this also did not raise questions for the majority."

Yes and the scientific community worked it was not flat.

"Incomprehensible entities, forces, fields, and other heaps,"

It is not incomprehensible to me, I measure light and reflectance data regularly and routinely as part of my job.
It is certainly not incomprehensible to the scientific community.

"The Universe is not the English Parliament."

What?

"One fundamental law is enough, from which all the others can be derived. The building must begin from the foundation, and not vice versa."

Not correct. Cosmology is empirical, it is built on data, if the law is not describing the data, the law, equations, theory, hypothesis is wrong.

Einstein thought his equation had a flaw so he put a factor in to fix it. He did not think the universe was expanding, the data said otherwise, he was wrong.

 

[(Q)]

So what? At one time it was believed that the Earth was flat

Many today believe the Earth is flat. Of course, these people are die hard religious zealots with very little brains in their head.

Just like religion, it was created long time ago by people with very little brains in their head.

 

[grzegorzsz830402]

Many today believe the Earth is flat. Of course, these people are die hard religious zealots with very little brains in their head.

Just like religion, it was created long time ago by people with very little brains in their head.

Actually, if you look at Religion from perspective that it was created to control masses and how effectively it can be achieved thanks to religions, then I don't think you can say, that people that have figure it out had very little brains in their head.

For example:
Do you know that if there is picture with pair of eyes in proximity of bus stop people will litter less.

Because subconsciously they feel being watched.


So if there is God that is watching them all the time....

you get the idea

I would recommend Robert Sapolsky lectures
Biological Underpinnings of Religiosity.

Although, I am not religious, I would not call Religious people with very little brains in their head.

Einstein

Religious beliefs. Albert Einstein himself stated "I'm not an atheist, and I don't think I can call myself a pantheist ... I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with fates and actions of human beings".


By the way, we understand what type of cultures come up with God who concerns himself with fates and actions of human beings and cultures that come up with God that does not.

 

[(Q)]

Actually, if you look at Religion from perspective that it was created to control masses and how effectively it can be achieved thanks to religions, then I don't think you can say, that people that have figure it out had very little brains in their head.

For example:
Do you know that if there is picture with pair of eyes in proximity of bus stop people will litter less.

Because subconsciously they feel being watched.

Yet, the religious right is currently destroying America, and they are being watched by the world, yet they don't care one iota.

So if there is God that is watching them all the time....

you get the idea

Yet, the religious right is destroying America under the watchful eyes of their God, yet they don't care one iota.

I would recommend Robert Sapolsky lectures
Biological Underpinnings of Religiosity.

Although, I am not religious, I would not call Religious people with very little brains in their head.

Fascists (religious people) are stupid, it's because to be a fascist, you don't have to know anything, just call the media fake, lie outrageously, add sprinklings of violence and viola!

 

[(Q)]

I don't like the phrase: "science doesn't know this". Everything should be explained consistently, without unnecessary entities.

Science would probably be huge giant steps ahead of where it is today, but unfortunately, religious zealots who believe only in the law of their god have done massive damage to people who wanted to understand the world around them over the centuries. It was an assault, just like it is today on truth and knowledge. That's why Trump and his goons want to control the universities, to decide who gets in and what they teach. Science will quickly disappear if they have their way.

 

[Olga]

"So what? At one time it was believed that the Earth was flat, and this also did not raise questions for the majority."

Yes and the scientific community worked it was not flat.

"Incomprehensible entities, forces, fields, and other heaps,"

It is not incomprehensible to me, I measure light and reflectance data regularly and routinely as part of my job.
It is certainly not incomprehensible to the scientific community.

"The Universe is not the English Parliament."

What?

"One fundamental law is enough, from which all the others can be derived. The building must begin from the foundation, and not vice versa."

Not correct. Cosmology is empirical, it is built on data, if the law is not describing the data, the law, equations, theory, hypothesis is wrong.

Einstein thought his equation had a flaw so he put a factor in to fix it. He did not think the universe was expanding, the data said otherwise, he was wrong.

Пин, в любом случае, расширяется ли пространство, или нет, нужно знать причины этого расширения. Я об этом так уж сильно ещё и не думала. Мне нужна информация, и я могу собрать полную картину в мелочах, если это так уж важно для вас.

 

[Olga]

Science would probably be huge giant steps ahead of where it is today, but unfortunately, religious zealots who believe only in the law of their god have done massive damage to people who wanted to understand the world around them over the centuries. It was an assault, just like it is today on truth and knowledge. That's why Trump and his goons want to control the universities, to decide who gets in and what they teach. Science will quickly disappear if they have their way.

Мартин, я где то читала, что если человек яростно нападает на кого то (например на гомосексуалистов), то эта тема для него является больной. Таким образом он борется с проявлениями гомосексуализма в себе. Т.е. он сам является гомосексуалистом, но воспитание, или ещё что то не позволяет ему в открытую это заявлять. Такие люди подсознательно стремятся попасть в общества мужчин, например в монастыри, и становятся ярыми борцами с гомосексуализмом. Почему ты Мартин так яростно нападаешь на христиан, и везде их преследуешь? Ты борешься сам с собой?

 

[grzegorzsz830402]

Yet, the religious right is currently destroying America, and they are being watched by the world, yet they don't care one iota.

Yet, the religious right is destroying America under the watchful eyes of their God, yet they don't care one iota.

Fascists (religious people) are stupid, it's because to be a fascist, you don't have to know anything, just call the media fake, lie outrageously, add sprinklings of violence and viola!

Ok. You are being a bit emotional I would prefer more rational approach.

I do not say that it can not backfire.
(backfire - have an opposite and undesirable effect to what was intended.)

"Yet, the religious right is currently destroying America"

What do you exactly mean here?