Life - How Should It Be Viewed?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    My Post # 30


    This question poses whether it is, in some fundamental ways, a moot point whether:

    - Canada, in its future federal election, elects a Liberal-NDP or a Conservative Government?
    - USA elects a Democratic or Republican Government federally?
    - China has an authoritarian "Communist" Government?
    - Russia has an authoritarian "Capitalist" Government?
    - The Scandinavian countries have "Social Democratic Capitalist" Governments?
    - Argentina has a "Libertarian Capitalist" Government?

    What do CT'ers think?


    Bob A (Theist Community)

    P.S. Even though the Theist Community is a "Religious" one, it believes it should "discuss" the real world, which involves politics..........but it is not its purview as a "religion" to direct its adherents as to their political affiliations.
    Last edited by Bob Armstrong; Wednesday, 6th March, 2024, 06:53 AM.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Bob Armstrong View Post

      a "Libertarian Capitalist" Government?

      Bob A
      There is nothing like a "Libertarian Capitalist". In Capitalism, Capital gives you an unfair ability to earn more, and gives you unfair power. In Libertarianism, all you can do with your Capital is 'enjoy' it; as for the 'earning' and 'power' aspects, everyone has access to the Capital they need.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Dilip Panjwani View Post

        Hi Sid,
        The hypothesis you and Alicia have generated is quite intriguing indeed!
        The phenomenon of 'Entanglement' is very close to my heart, as it gives us hope of 'living on' after death. The determinants within our brains of the electromagnetic waves which have the property of consciousness, could very well be entangled as a unit elsewhere, and as you would know, when one of the entangled units becomes less cohesive (eventually dying), the cohesiveness of the other units becomes stronger! And for all you know, our entire bodies may have an entangled counterpart elsewhere...
        Deepak Chopra and others, on the other hand, believe that our consciousness merges with the other conscious electromagnetism in the universe, amazingly enhancing what 'we' experience...
        Most scientists and philosophers however subscribe to the view that death marks the end of our souls (our consciousness of 'me', our memories, our thoughts, our consciousness as a whole)
        By the way, stay tuned for my upcoming book: "Anatomy of the soul"...
        Hi Dilip,

        "A Nested Wave Model for Quantum Non-locality: Reconciling with Special Relativity
        By Sidney H Belzberg and Alicia Belzberg
        Introduction
        Quantum entanglement, the mysterious correlation between distant particles, has been a subject of intense research and debate since its discovery. The standard model of quantum mechanics, based on the concept of superposition, describes entanglement as an instantaneous, unmediated connection between particles, leading to the paradoxical concept of "spooky action at a distance." However, recent experimental evidence from the Micius satellite experiment challenges this view and supports the idea of a communication mechanism between entangled particles that can be disrupted by environmental factors. This evidence aligns more closely with a pilot wave interpretation of quantum mechanics, which offers a deterministic and realistic description of quantum phenomena.
        The Micius satellite experiment (Yin et al., 2017) demonstrated quantum entanglement distribution over a distance of 1,200 kilometers. The experiment revealed the impact of atmospheric turbulence on the entangled photons, suggesting the presence of a communication mechanism between the particles that can be disrupted by external factors. This observation challenges the standard model's assumption of instantaneous, unmediated communication and supports the idea of a physical mechanism underlying entanglement, akin to the pilot wave interpretation.
        Our nested wave model proposes a communication mechanism between entangled particles that is subject to decoherence and can be influenced by the environment. The model introduces a hidden wave structure (Wave 2) that interacts with the conventional wavefunction (Wave 1) and mediates the entanglement process. As the distance between entangled particles increases, the decoherence effects become more pronounced, leading to a reduction in the number of detectable entanglement events and a potential delay in the observed correlations.
        The concept of decoherence, which was first introduced in the 1970s by physicists such as Heinz-Dieter Zeh, Wojciech Zurek, and Erich Joos, proposes a gradual process rather than an instantaneous collapse of the quantum superposition. Decoherence theory suggests that the interaction between a quantum system and its environment leads to a gradual loss of coherence over time, causing the system to evolve from a pure quantum state to a mixed state. This gradual nature of decoherence has been supported by numerous experimental observations and is a key feature of the theory.
        In the context of quantum entanglement, the decoherence theory implies that the entangled state of two particles would gradually degrade as the particles interact with their environment, leading to a loss of entanglement over time and distance. This gradual degradation is consistent with the observed decrease in entanglement detection in experiments like the Micius satellite.
        The evidence from the Micius satellite experiment aligns with the predictions of our nested wave model and provides empirical support for the existence of a communication mechanism that can be disrupted by environmental factors. This challenges the notion of superposition and instantaneous, unmediated communication between entangled particles, as implied by the standard model. Instead, it favors a pilot wave interpretation, where a physical mechanism guides the behavior of entangled particles.
        The pilot wave interpretation, originally proposed by Louis de Broglie and later developed by David Bohm, suggests that particles are guided by a hidden wave function that determines their trajectories. This interpretation offers a deterministic and realistic description of quantum phenomena, including entanglement. The idea of a hidden wave structure mediating the entanglement process, as proposed in our nested wave model, aligns with the pilot wave interpretation.
        It is important to note that the pilot wave interpretation and our nested wave model do not contradict the influential work of John Stewart Bell, particularly his famous Bell's theorem. Bell's theorem dealt a significant blow to the idea of local hidden variables as a possible explanation for the apparent non-locality of quantum entanglement. However, our nested wave model, by proposing a non-local communication mechanism mediated by the hidden wave structure, is consistent with the implications of Bell's theorem.
        Furthermore, it is essential to address the inapplicability of relativistic time dilation in explaining the observed non-local behavior of entangled particles. Time dilation, a consequence of special relativity, relates to the relative motion between reference frames and affects the passage of time. However, the instantaneous correlation between entangled particles, regardless of their spatial separation, defies the constraints of special relativity and cannot be explained by time dilation alone.
        Attempting to use time dilation to describe the non-local behavior of entangled particles would be akin to comparing apples and oranges. The motion of particles, governed by special relativity, is fundamentally different from the non-local correlation exhibited by entangled particles. Applying relativistic concepts like time dilation to explain entanglement would be inconsistent with the observed instantaneous nature of the correlation.
        If our hypothesis is correct, and the Micius satellite experiment reveals, in addition to the observed decrease in entanglement detection, a small delay in the entangled photon correlations due to decoherence of the surviving entangled particles, it could have significant implications not only for our understanding of quantum entanglement but also for the theory of general relativity. The focus on the surviving entangled particles highlights the importance of studying the remnants of the entanglement process, as they may hold crucial information about the underlying mechanisms and the effects of decoherence.
        The gradual nature of decoherence, as opposed to instantaneous superposition collapse, aligns well with our hypothesis and the potential observation of a delay in the surviving entangled particles. It supports the notion that the entangled particles can partially withstand the effects of decoherence, and the delay in their correlations would be a manifestation of this gradual process.
        General relativity, Einstein's theory of gravity, describes the curvature of spacetime caused by the presence of mass and energy. The observation of a delay in entangled photon correlations could suggest that the non-local communication between entangled particles propagates through a hidden spacetime structure, implying that the fabric of spacetime itself plays a role in mediating the non-local effects of quantum entanglement.
        Furthermore, the delay could provide insights into the nature of quantum gravity, the long-sought theory that aims to unify quantum mechanics and general relativity. If the delay is found to be related to the curvature of spacetime or the presence of gravitational fields, it could offer clues about how gravity emerges from quantum phenomena and how it affects the behavior of entangled particles.
        Validating our nested wave model, which aligns with the pilot wave interpretation, would also have significant implications for the underlying philosophy of the standard model. The pilot wave interpretation posits that the behavior of quantum systems is fundamentally deterministic, contradicting the probabilistic nature of the standard model's description. If our model is validated, it would support the notion that the apparent randomness and uncertainty in quantum mechanics are due to our lack of knowledge about the underlying deterministic processes, rather than being inherent to reality itself.
        Moreover, the pilot wave interpretation asserts that particles have well-defined positions and trajectories at all times, even when they are not being observed. This contrasts with the standard model's interpretation, where particles are described by probability distributions and their properties are considered to be undefined until measured. Validating our model would support the idea of an objective reality that exists independently of observation and challenge the standard model's assumption that quantum mechanics is complete and cannot be supplemented by additional variables.
        In conclusion, the Micius satellite experiment provides valuable insights into the nature of quantum entanglement and supports the idea of a communication mechanism between entangled particles that can be influenced by environmental factors. Our nested wave model offers a theoretical framework that accounts for these observations and aligns more closely with a pilot wave interpretation of quantum mechanics, challenging the standard model's concept of superposition and instantaneous, unmediated communication.
        The potential observation of a delay in entangled photon correlations due to decoherence, particularly in the surviving entangled particles, could have profound implications for our understanding of general relativity, quantum gravity, and the fundamental nature of spacetime and matter. It could provide a crucial empirical foothold for developing a more complete theory of quantum gravity and bridging the gap between quantum mechanics and our understanding of gravity.
        Furthermore, validating our nested wave model would represent a significant shift in the underlying philosophy of quantum mechanics, supporting a deterministic and realistic view of reality and challenging the probabilistic and observer-dependent aspects of the standard model.
        By building upon the foundations laid by the work of Bell, Zeh, and others and seeking our nested wave model, we aim to contribute to the field and advance our understanding of these fundamental questions in quantum mechanics and the nature of reality.

        https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aan3211

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by Sid Belzberg View Post

          Hi Dilip,

          "A Nested Wave Model for Quantum Non-locality: Reconciling with Special Relativity
          By Sidney H Belzberg and Alicia Belzberg
          Introduction
          Quantum entanglement, the mysterious correlation between distant particles, has been a subject of intense research and debate since its discovery. The standard model of quantum mechanics, based on the concept of superposition, describes entanglement as an instantaneous, unmediated connection between particles, leading to the paradoxical concept of "spooky action at a distance." However, recent experimental evidence from the Micius satellite experiment challenges this view and supports the idea of a communication mechanism between entangled particles that can be disrupted by environmental factors. This evidence aligns more closely with a pilot wave interpretation of quantum mechanics, which offers a deterministic and realistic description of quantum phenomena.
          The Micius satellite experiment (Yin et al., 2017) demonstrated quantum entanglement distribution over a distance of 1,200 kilometers. The experiment revealed the impact of atmospheric turbulence on the entangled photons, suggesting the presence of a communication mechanism between the particles that can be disrupted by external factors. This observation challenges the standard model's assumption of instantaneous, unmediated communication and supports the idea of a physical mechanism underlying entanglement, akin to the pilot wave interpretation.
          Our nested wave model proposes a communication mechanism between entangled particles that is subject to decoherence and can be influenced by the environment. The model introduces a hidden wave structure (Wave 2) that interacts with the conventional wavefunction (Wave 1) and mediates the entanglement process. As the distance between entangled particles increases, the decoherence effects become more pronounced, leading to a reduction in the number of detectable entanglement events and a potential delay in the observed correlations.
          The concept of decoherence, which was first introduced in the 1970s by physicists such as Heinz-Dieter Zeh, Wojciech Zurek, and Erich Joos, proposes a gradual process rather than an instantaneous collapse of the quantum superposition. Decoherence theory suggests that the interaction between a quantum system and its environment leads to a gradual loss of coherence over time, causing the system to evolve from a pure quantum state to a mixed state. This gradual nature of decoherence has been supported by numerous experimental observations and is a key feature of the theory.
          In the context of quantum entanglement, the decoherence theory implies that the entangled state of two particles would gradually degrade as the particles interact with their environment, leading to a loss of entanglement over time and distance. This gradual degradation is consistent with the observed decrease in entanglement detection in experiments like the Micius satellite.
          The evidence from the Micius satellite experiment aligns with the predictions of our nested wave model and provides empirical support for the existence of a communication mechanism that can be disrupted by environmental factors. This challenges the notion of superposition and instantaneous, unmediated communication between entangled particles, as implied by the standard model. Instead, it favors a pilot wave interpretation, where a physical mechanism guides the behavior of entangled particles.
          The pilot wave interpretation, originally proposed by Louis de Broglie and later developed by David Bohm, suggests that particles are guided by a hidden wave function that determines their trajectories. This interpretation offers a deterministic and realistic description of quantum phenomena, including entanglement. The idea of a hidden wave structure mediating the entanglement process, as proposed in our nested wave model, aligns with the pilot wave interpretation.
          It is important to note that the pilot wave interpretation and our nested wave model do not contradict the influential work of John Stewart Bell, particularly his famous Bell's theorem. Bell's theorem dealt a significant blow to the idea of local hidden variables as a possible explanation for the apparent non-locality of quantum entanglement. However, our nested wave model, by proposing a non-local communication mechanism mediated by the hidden wave structure, is consistent with the implications of Bell's theorem.
          Furthermore, it is essential to address the inapplicability of relativistic time dilation in explaining the observed non-local behavior of entangled particles. Time dilation, a consequence of special relativity, relates to the relative motion between reference frames and affects the passage of time. However, the instantaneous correlation between entangled particles, regardless of their spatial separation, defies the constraints of special relativity and cannot be explained by time dilation alone.
          Attempting to use time dilation to describe the non-local behavior of entangled particles would be akin to comparing apples and oranges. The motion of particles, governed by special relativity, is fundamentally different from the non-local correlation exhibited by entangled particles. Applying relativistic concepts like time dilation to explain entanglement would be inconsistent with the observed instantaneous nature of the correlation.
          If our hypothesis is correct, and the Micius satellite experiment reveals, in addition to the observed decrease in entanglement detection, a small delay in the entangled photon correlations due to decoherence of the surviving entangled particles, it could have significant implications not only for our understanding of quantum entanglement but also for the theory of general relativity. The focus on the surviving entangled particles highlights the importance of studying the remnants of the entanglement process, as they may hold crucial information about the underlying mechanisms and the effects of decoherence.
          The gradual nature of decoherence, as opposed to instantaneous superposition collapse, aligns well with our hypothesis and the potential observation of a delay in the surviving entangled particles. It supports the notion that the entangled particles can partially withstand the effects of decoherence, and the delay in their correlations would be a manifestation of this gradual process.
          General relativity, Einstein's theory of gravity, describes the curvature of spacetime caused by the presence of mass and energy. The observation of a delay in entangled photon correlations could suggest that the non-local communication between entangled particles propagates through a hidden spacetime structure, implying that the fabric of spacetime itself plays a role in mediating the non-local effects of quantum entanglement.
          Furthermore, the delay could provide insights into the nature of quantum gravity, the long-sought theory that aims to unify quantum mechanics and general relativity. If the delay is found to be related to the curvature of spacetime or the presence of gravitational fields, it could offer clues about how gravity emerges from quantum phenomena and how it affects the behavior of entangled particles.
          Validating our nested wave model, which aligns with the pilot wave interpretation, would also have significant implications for the underlying philosophy of the standard model. The pilot wave interpretation posits that the behavior of quantum systems is fundamentally deterministic, contradicting the probabilistic nature of the standard model's description. If our model is validated, it would support the notion that the apparent randomness and uncertainty in quantum mechanics are due to our lack of knowledge about the underlying deterministic processes, rather than being inherent to reality itself.
          Moreover, the pilot wave interpretation asserts that particles have well-defined positions and trajectories at all times, even when they are not being observed. This contrasts with the standard model's interpretation, where particles are described by probability distributions and their properties are considered to be undefined until measured. Validating our model would support the idea of an objective reality that exists independently of observation and challenge the standard model's assumption that quantum mechanics is complete and cannot be supplemented by additional variables.
          In conclusion, the Micius satellite experiment provides valuable insights into the nature of quantum entanglement and supports the idea of a communication mechanism between entangled particles that can be influenced by environmental factors. Our nested wave model offers a theoretical framework that accounts for these observations and aligns more closely with a pilot wave interpretation of quantum mechanics, challenging the standard model's concept of superposition and instantaneous, unmediated communication.
          The potential observation of a delay in entangled photon correlations due to decoherence, particularly in the surviving entangled particles, could have profound implications for our understanding of general relativity, quantum gravity, and the fundamental nature of spacetime and matter. It could provide a crucial empirical foothold for developing a more complete theory of quantum gravity and bridging the gap between quantum mechanics and our understanding of gravity.
          Furthermore, validating our nested wave model would represent a significant shift in the underlying philosophy of quantum mechanics, supporting a deterministic and realistic view of reality and challenging the probabilistic and observer-dependent aspects of the standard model.
          By building upon the foundations laid by the work of Bell, Zeh, and others and seeking our nested wave model, we aim to contribute to the field and advance our understanding of these fundamental questions in quantum mechanics and the nature of reality.

          https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aan3211
          Thank you, Sid. "Observer-dependence" can still apply to 'consciousness': e.g. if robots have consciousness, it would be totally different from 'human' consciousness, given that the building blocks of the two classes of consciousness (human vs computer) would be different...

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by Dilip Panjwani View Post

            Thank you, Sid. "Observer-dependence" can still apply to 'consciousness': e.g. if robots have consciousness, it would be totally different from 'human' consciousness, given that the building blocks of the two classes of consciousness (human vs computer) would be different...
            Originally posted by Sid Belzberg
            validating our nested wave model would represent a significant shift in the underlying philosophy of quantum mechanics, supporting a deterministic and realistic view of reality and challenging the probabilistic and observer-dependent aspects of the standard model."
            I think the building blocks are at a quantum level, and whether it is humans or a non-DNA-based form, a decade from now, it is very possible we could see sentient AI. The Alpha Zero chess program was the first to go from brute force, i.e., tree search, to throwing random positions that would play themselves millions of times for each position and effectively create a ranked regression file of winning patterns. When something learns by random patterns thrown at it via trial and error, we begin to simulate how a human learns via patterns.
            During the pandemic, I developed a summarizer that used a masked language protocol to teach itself how to understand words in the context of other words around it.
            Basically, you throw out a random sentence with words in the middle that are masked, the machine randomly guesses which words fit, and eventually, when it figures out which words fit the highest percentage of the time, stores it in a ranked list of which words are most probable to fit in.

            Like the learning technique in the alpha zero chess program, language learning is done by patterns. The problem with programs like chatgpt and Gemini is that they were trained in this way on enormous large language datasets (LLMs), which give the illusion of communicating when they fit in the most probable phrase at the end of a sentence. This leads to nonsensical results and their inability to generate accurate references. Not to mention deliberately biased datasets on which they train. So, for now, this type of AI is a parlor trick, but it is a great start.

            I have started working on an article for our doctor's forum that posits the real "building blocks of consciousness" starting at a subatomic level.


            A unified theory for human consciousness via Quantum consciousness and Special relativity

            The interplay between quantum physics and human consciousness has long captivated scientists and philosophers alike. Recent advances in both fields suggest we may be on the cusp of a unified theory that bridges the microscopic quantum realm with the macroscopic world of the mind. The potential connections between quantum mechanics, human consciousness, and brain-to-brain coupling, drawing on seminal work by Dr. Roger Penrose and Dr. Stuart Hameroff, groundbreaking studies in verbal communication, and a novel provable hypothesis by Alicia Belzberg and Sidney Belzberg on quantum non-locality.


            Dr. Penrose and Dr. Hameroff's Orchestrated Objective Reduction (Orch-OR) theory posits that consciousness arises from quantum processes within the brain's microtubules. This revolutionary idea suggests that the brain's biomolecular processes are intertwined with the fundamental structure of the universe, bridging quantum mechanics with the emergence of conscious awareness. Their theory, which incorporates the Diósi-Penrose (DP) scheme of 'objective reduction,' implies that conscious moments are the result of quantum state reduction, linking the brain's biological processes to the universe's basic structure.

            https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24070914/



            Parallel to this, the study on verbal communication by Stephens, G.J., Silbert, L.J., & Hasson, U. (2010) highlights the neural coupling between speakers and listeners during effective communication. This research demonstrates that successful verbal exchange results in the spatial and temporal synchronization of brain activities, suggesting a profound inter-brain connection that underlies comprehension and shared understanding. The predictive anticipatory responses observed in listeners' brains further underscore the complexity of neural synchronization, hinting at a deeper, possibly quantum, level of communication.
            https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20660768/

            Building upon these insights, we propose a nested wave model to reconcile quantum non-locality with the principles of special relativity. Their hypothesis introduces a hidden wave structure that interacts with conventional wavefunctions, mediating non-local entanglement effects over distances. This model, which includes a modified Schrödinger equation to account for decoherence and entanglement severity, suggests that quantum processes could exhibit delays over distances, providing a potential mechanism for observed quantum effects in biological systems.

            The synthesis of these theories and findings points towards a unified understanding of quantum physics and human consciousness. The nested wave model offers a mathematical framework that could underpin the quantum processes proposed by Penrose and Hameroff, potentially explaining the mechanism of quantum coherence within microtubules and its role in consciousness. Moreover, the demonstrated brain-to-brain coupling in verbal communication might be underlain by these quantum processes, suggesting a tangible link between quantum mechanics and social interaction.

            This unified theory implies that consciousness and interpersonal communication are not merely emergent properties of complex biological systems but are fundamentally connected to the universe's quantum fabric. It opens new avenues for investigating consciousness, not as an isolated phenomenon but as an integral aspect of the quantum world. Future research, guided by these theories, could unravel the quantum underpinnings of neural synchronization, providing insights into the nature of consciousness and its place in the universe.

            The confluence of quantum physics, neuroscience, and the study of human communication heralds a new era of understanding in both science and philosophy. By exploring the quantum mechanics of consciousness and its implications for brain-to-brain coupling, we edge closer to uncovering the universe's deepest secrets and our own place within it. The work of Penrose and Hameroff, alongside our hypothesis and studies in neural communication, lays the groundwork for a future where the boundaries between mind, matter, and the cosmos become indistinguishable.

            Last edited by Sid Belzberg; Thursday, 7th March, 2024, 10:26 AM.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Sid Belzberg View Post




              A unified theory for human consciousness...


              The building blocks of consciousness are likely much simpler than what the Orch-OR hypothesis postulates (simplicity characterizes truth more often than complexity does).
              Before we explain how it arises, let us first look at the 'properties' of the phenomenon of consciousness:
              1. Neuroscientists and Philosophers generally agree that consciousness is something which simply rides along some of the activities of the brain (including the emotion generating activity), without having any impact on the functioning of the brain. Yes, even though it may appear to us that our 'Anger' can impact on what we do next, the reality is that the neuronal activity that generates the anger is the neurofunctional cause leading to the neurofunctional effect on the ongoing brain activity, both conscious and sub-conscious.
              2. While our consciousness corelates with reality, physicists are very certain that what we perceive as reality, is very different from the physical reality itself. As an example, physical reality is composed of waves of energy (physicists are sure of this, and are certain that particles do not exist), but we 'see' and 'feel' reality as particulate.
              Now, let us ask ourselves a simple question: What is it in our brains that corelates with neuronal activity, without having any impact on it? The answer is: Electromagnetic waves generated by neuronal activity.... they are the building blocks of consciousness!! To understand how the electromagnetic activity within the brain leads to consciousness, and random (even if similar) electromagnetic activity does not, and why some neuronal activity is subconscious, you will have to read my upcoming book, as it needs a much more detailed explanation than can be / should be fitted into a chesstalk post.... Failure to explain this is what led the scientific community to sort of disregard McFadden & Pockett's theory of Electromagnetic Consciousness... But, as you will read in my upcoming book, there is a very obvious explanation for it....
              Last edited by Dilip Panjwani; Thursday, 7th March, 2024, 09:44 PM.

              Comment


              • #37
                "Humans do have "free will"!"

                So far, I think I may be the only CT'er here who has publicly agreed with this statement. It has been attacked as out-of-date according to the new science of "determinism".

                It is argued that humans do "choose" between options......BUT......prior experience and circumstances have "fixed" which option the human will choose.

                It is argued that the idea that a human can "choose freely" to pick an option against the pre-determined choice is false. The human will, and MUST, choose the pre-determined option.

                I'm curious..........

                Question: Am I the only dinosaur among the CT'ers coming here who still believes in "free will"?

                Bob A

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Bob Armstrong View Post
                  "Humans do have "free will"!"

                  So far, I think I may be the only CT'er here who has publicly agreed with this statement. It has been attacked as out-of-date according to the new science of "determinism".

                  It is argued that humans do "choose" between options......BUT......prior experience and circumstances have "fixed" which option the human will choose.

                  It is argued that the idea that a human can "choose freely" to pick an option against the pre-determined choice is false. The human will, and MUST, choose the pre-determined option.

                  I'm curious..........

                  Question: Am I the only dinosaur among the CT'ers coming here who still believes in "free will"?

                  Bob A
                  Bob, I certainly have no problem with free will. Just like with climate change and COVID, you continually misinterpret scientific findings and make
                  incorrect statements on subjects that you have no clue about, as your background is not science. That does not deter you from continually misstating other CTer's posts.
                  Quantum mechanics introduces indeterminacy at a microscopic level, but this randomness should not be conflated with the philosophical notion of free will in human decision-making. The nested wave hypothesis, suggesting quantum states are "unknown" rather than purely probabilistic, speaks to a deterministic yet complex universe—not directly to human consciousness or free will.
                  Last edited by Sid Belzberg; Sunday, 10th March, 2024, 03:03 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by Sid Belzberg View Post

                    ... quantum states are "unknown" rather than purely probabilistic, speaks to a deterministic yet complex universe—not directly to human consciousness or free will.
                    Absolutely!
                    Bob thinks that there is some imaginary (i.e. without any scientific basis) entity that, in humans, 'chooses' differently (i.e., in his 'belief', 'freely') from the 'choosing' AI or the brain would perform. He 'believes' in this only because that is what he has been told to believe in, and that is what probably most people he mingles with believe...
                    Last edited by Dilip Panjwani; Sunday, 10th March, 2024, 03:42 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by Dilip Panjwani View Post

                      Absolutely!
                      Bob thinks that there is some imaginary (i.e. without any scientific basis) entity that, in humans, 'chooses' differently (i.e., in his 'belief', 'freely') from the 'choosing' AI or the brain would perform. He 'believes' in this only because that is what he has been told to believe in, and that is what probably most people he mingles with believe...
                      Bob A., you should by now know who you are really dealing with in Dilip Panjwani and Sid Belzberg. These people are against the possibility there could be any supernatural aspect to our reality.

                      I have just returned today from Europe and am catching up with this thread. Whatever you may have intended Bob A., you can be sure these people will turn this thread into a debate on whether God or Gods exist.

                      And here Dilip even goes so far as to say that if you believe in any kind of god, which he calls "imaginary entity", you do so only because you have been told to or you have absorbed this belief from others.

                      And soon Dilip promises us a book of his wherein he will tell us what to believe about human consciousness.



                      Last edited by Pargat Perrer; Monday, 11th March, 2024, 01:43 AM.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by Dilip Panjwani View Post

                        The building blocks of consciousness are likely much simpler than what the Orch-OR hypothesis postulates (simplicity characterizes truth more often than complexity does).
                        Before we explain how it arises, let us first look at the 'properties' of the phenomenon of consciousness:
                        1. Neuroscientists and Philosophers generally agree that consciousness is something which simply rides along some of the activities of the brain (including the emotion generating activity), without having any impact on the functioning of the brain. Yes, even though it may appear to us that our 'Anger' can impact on what we do next, the reality is that the neuronal activity that generates the anger is the neurofunctional cause leading to the neurofunctional effect on the ongoing brain activity, both conscious and sub-conscious.
                        2. While our consciousness corelates with reality, physicists are very certain that what we perceive as reality, is very different from the physical reality itself. As an example, physical reality is composed of waves of energy (physicists are sure of this, and are certain that particles do not exist), but we 'see' and 'feel' reality as particulate.
                        Now, let us ask ourselves a simple question: What is it in our brains that corelates with neuronal activity, without having any impact on it? The answer is: Electromagnetic waves generated by neuronal activity.... they are the building blocks of consciousness!! To understand how the electromagnetic activity within the brain leads to consciousness, and random (even if similar) electromagnetic activity does not, and why some neuronal activity is subconscious, you will have to read my upcoming book, as it needs a much more detailed explanation than can be / should be fitted into a chesstalk post.... Failure to explain this is what led the scientific community to sort of disregard McFadden & Pockett's theory of Electromagnetic Consciousness... But, as you will read in my upcoming book, there is a very obvious explanation for it....
                        Since you have this explanation in hand, you must also have some ideas for programming the production of the appropriate EM waves into digital circuitry so that robots can achieve consciousness. Perhaps you will even invent what Asimov termed in his famous robot novels the "positronic brain".

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Human "Free Will"

                          Source: I believe that one source of the "free will" concept comes from "Religion/Spirituality". That is because all Religions believe that humans are "moral" animals. Thus they CAN choose between "good" and "evil" (Such choice is not pre-determined, despite some modern science views). So man/woman is "responsible" for their judgments and actions. The Supra-Natural, the Creator, puts a condition on a human coming into being - they are to do "the good" and avoid doing "evil/The bad". Modern Determinism replaces this with humans are not allowed to do "damage" (Even though it is not their "choice"; they are pre-determined). Society to function cannot have humans running amok causing "damage".

                          Question: Why is it that many atheists hold that man is an "ethical" animal (The secular equivalent of religious/spiritual "morality")? They argue that man is responsible and has free will just from the fundamental elements that make up "Human Nature"! Do any CT'ers hold this position......if so, can you elaborate on how you deal with "modern science determinism"?

                          Bob A (Theist Community)

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Click image for larger version

Name:	Life2.jpg
Views:	116
Size:	27.5 KB
ID:	232304

                            Bob's View of "Life":

                            The Life Force: "Inanimate" matter can, when properly configured, and in the right environment, become "animate". I consider this a "mystery of Nature".

                            Vitality: At the time life is generated, a unique Spirit is created just for that living matter. It partners with its matter 'til the matter can no longer sustain its own life. This is pre-programmed by the Creator of All.

                            Personality: The result of this partnership of matter-Spirit.

                            Death - The matter returns to dust; the Spirit enjoys eternal vitality!


                            Bob A (Theist Community)


                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by Bob Armstrong;

                              [SIZE=14px
                              The Life Force: "Inanimate" matter can, when properly configured, and in the right environment, become "animate". I consider this a "mystery of Nature".[/SIZE]


                              Bob A

                              That is 'dinosaural' thinking, to use your own terminology, Bob. As Sid has repeatedly said, you make comments without reading what is posted here; you obviously did not read the Scientific American article: 'Does life really exist?'
                              Last edited by Dilip Panjwani; Monday, 11th March, 2024, 08:21 AM.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Sorry Dilip - I did not read the Scientific American article......I will look for it in the prior posts......thanks for alerting me.....though likely the content is going to be somewhat challenging to my view of inanimate/animate matter.

                                Bob A

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X