The Biocentric Universe

Avi1223 said:
Tao, are you a scientist ? I practice engineering and science as well. Are there any other scientists on this forum ? I have become more interested in the interface between science and religion and I think it might be interesting to explore this interface on topics of a more technical nature. Some obvious areas are origin of the universe and origin of species. What do you think ?
Click to expand...

No. I only attended about 25% of highschool. I just like reading and have kept up to date as a lay person. I did a 1 year correspondence course "introduction to science" through the Open University, which was helpful but thats it.

There are threads here in which I have been a contributer that tackle these questions. My take is that Big bang/ expansion theory is wrong and that the key to understanding the origin of life lays in research into viruses, phages, eucaryotes and other, now extinct, non celular life forms. If you were to start threads on any area of science doubtless you would find me chiming in with my opinions.
 
Yes, after I posted I read more of the back threads and saw that there was some discussion of these topics.

Also, I thought a little more about the Nature and Science articles and there would be some serious challenges to the copyright and permission requirements, so that might not be possible.

I might be possible to post them as links if I can find articles that are already on the internet. I will start by looking for some of those.
 
Actually, Tao, I have a question for you on another topic, why isn't there a sub-forum here on Atheism ?
 
Lack of demand? Kind of suits me being 'homeless', gives me carte blanch to creep in wherever and whenever I like ;)
 
ah, so the idea has been proposed before Robert Lonzo. It was John Wheeler who used the idea of the Universe as a self-excited circuit . . .

wheelereye.jpg


Law Without Law by John Archibald Wheeler

Interesting read above. So the two/double-slit experiment is the foundation of the scientific evidence for the biocentric universe. No, I do not know anything about the experiment . . .
 
Ahanu said:
ah, so the idea has been proposed before Robert Lonzo. It was John Wheeler who used the idea of the Universe as a self-excited circuit . . .

wheelereye.jpg


Law Without Law by John Archibald Wheeler

Interesting read above. So the two/double-slit experiment is the foundation of the scientific evidence for the biocentric universe. No, I do not know anything about the experiment . . .
Click to expand...

just in case anyone is interested in this theory, more about Wheeler in Langans cognitive theoretical model of the universe, synthesising determinancy/indeterminancy via self determinancy!

http://megafoundation.org/CTMU/Articles/Langan_CTMU_092902.pdf
 
Ooo, I love multiple universes. Just thinking about it makes me all giggly. Even thinking about the multiple realities that each of us could be going through simultaneously. And especially that data may travel between the universes as ideas. Like, your favorite movies and books may be real somewhere! And you are simultaneously doing everything that you could possibly have done in your life. It's soo cool!

Sorry, it just fascinates me so...
 
immortalitylost said:
Sorry, it just fascinates me so...
Click to expand...

I can be a little insomniac and lying in the dark waiting for sleep to come there is nothing I love more than try to imagine what our immediate reality is in a knowable sense. Multiverses may exist but they are, if they do exist, twisted out of the grasp of our sensory machinery so they are impossible to perceive. Unless you believe we can access the weirdness of the quantum foam in a meaningful way.
I can grok that super-reality is two dimensional and how we can still percieve it as three dimensions + time and how other dimensions are folded out of sight that we cannot see. And I understand that if the universe was a singularity, a black hole, it would have a weight consistant with that we measure. Which I find very, very interesting. Since the innards of a singularity get incredibly cold and atoms fall into a quantum uncertainty zone where, theoretically, they could be influenced if you can study its entangled twin, perhaps then you can use some mysterious neural cannon to create any universe you want. Perhaps you get what you pray for!! Time is an illusion, every branch of physics seems to agree on that much, perhaps every galaxy is one living being creating all its dreams. Not gods, no more than a squirrel is a living being, just things that dream of what is possible. Perhaps the quest to understand the laws of physics will one day reveal they are equivelant to DNA, the individual laws like chromosones. Who knows......anything is possible in infinity.....and I do believe in infinity. What I do know is that what physics predicted and our telescopes and instruments have confirmed is incredibly beautiful and even more incredibly complex..... And its complexity seems only to increase the more you look. Its why I cannot sully it with these childish attempts to own it with some name that ironically some people even type with blanks like it was a swear word. I think there is a huge collective freudian slip in there somewhere. What our scientists and instrument makers and engineers have allowed us to see is far more beautiful and profound than any near savages revelation from some corner of a corner that doesnt matter. If you are going to believe in any of this g-d stuff might as well appoint yourself god, think yourself a galaxy full of possibilities that appeal,
*pauses to dream* ,
and be happy that since time is all illusionary you already did it and are enjoying the fruits of it now!! So if you are having a hard time its your fault!!
Ah shut me up now.....its always my fault!!! See!! Its real!!
 
Lol, yeah I never did get that not typing God thing...

I agree, this universe is beautiful in and of itself, whether you see it as a creation or not.

Ha, squirrels, lol. *snort*

Hmm, well because you gave a reason why you don't believe in God, I guess I'll give a reason why I'm not an atheist. Seems only fair. ;)

I don't like the idea of being the sum of the parts of the matter in my body. I don't like the idea that there isn't something more to what makes me me than chemical reactions in this body and electrical impulses in this brain. I want a soul. Maybe it's selfish of me, but it's my main problem with atheism. I want answers after I die. Blinking out would suck...

And from all that I've experienced, I can't really make myself believe that beings don't have souls. Like, I can't personally do this. No matter how I try. I have no scientific data or nothin to support my beliefs or lack thereof. I just can't make myself believe that there is nothing besides the physical, based on a lifetime of personal accumulated data. Not research data mind you, just data I obtained by being alive.

But, everyone is different, so I can see how people would believe the complete opposite to me. For exactly the same reasons. And I'm cool with that. Variety is the spice of life after all, lol. :D
 
immortalitylost said:
Lol, yeah I never did get that not typing God thing...

I agree, this universe is beautiful in and of itself, whether you see it as a creation or not.

Ha, squirrels, lol. *snort*

Hmm, well because you gave a reason why you don't believe in God, I guess I'll give a reason why I'm not an atheist. Seems only fair. ;)

I don't like the idea of being the sum of the parts of the matter in my body. I don't like the idea that there isn't something more to what makes me me than chemical reactions in this body and electrical impulses in this brain. I want a soul. Maybe it's selfish of me, but it's my main problem with atheism. I want answers after I die. Blinking out would suck...

And from all that I've experienced, I can't really make myself believe that beings don't have souls. Like, I can't personally do this. No matter how I try. I have no scientific data or nothin to support my beliefs or lack thereof. I just can't make myself believe that there is nothing besides the physical, based on a lifetime of personal accumulated data. Not research data mind you, just data I obtained by being alive.

But, everyone is different, so I can see how people would believe the complete opposite to me. For exactly the same reasons. And I'm cool with that. Variety is the spice of life after all, lol. :D
Click to expand...

Can you not have a soul without some god? Can you not have extraordinary experience without some god? I do believe time is an illusion, time leakage would explain 99.9% of mystical and psychic experience. No god required. I believe people do have genuine experiences out with the ability of our talents to explain. I think reality is far more complex than our physical lives lived out in linear time. But there is a futility to giving life to a god, it explains nothing. And that is why it is so appealing. You think it has explained...when it clearly has not. You do not have to think about it any more... In a universe of chaotic and apparently randomly increasing complexity we need an anchor.....an excuse to stop asking questions... and so embrace that warm placebo of belief.
I have almost succumbed myself. When I have faced great disappointments in my journey. But crucially I escaped the indoctrination in my early life, and was able to resist. I am the sum of my history so far, warts and all. I have not been lucky to have had an amazing life, (a life that many might think fiction if I was to write it down in its entirety), I have gone out and sought it. There is a world of experience beyond the door but you have to step through it. Religion is often also a surrogate for experience, a kind of lazy mans effort of seeking the wisdom of the traveller. Religion is so often laziness and excuse, a denial of personal responsibility and accountability. And when its not that its even worse!! So what does it have going for it? No thanks, no god for me till it pops itself into existence before me and tells a decent joke.
 
Tao_Equus said:
Interesting lecture with the title "Does reality have a genetic basis?"

q2cfestival.com
Click to expand...

i liked the way he defined mathematics; it is an extra sensory mechanism of humanity. the theoretical physicist here also mentions john wheeler at the end. kool.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top