I think Ron Pearson's grid theory of the supermind of outerspace may have some truth in it. Information of everything that is happening in the entire universe is already available to this 'supermind' aka God. Quantum entanglement experiments already show that quantum waves can react to a change faster than light speed. Information then (telepathy, thought, etc) could move almost instantaneously (near infinite speed) as well. If consiousness was required to create matter (all matter is made of quantum waves/particles) then consciouness would have to precede the existance of anything quantum related. Consciouness would then have to exist on an even deeper level than that of the quantum level. Perhaps this so-called dark energy believed responsible for the increased acceleration of the universe is really the intelligent aether or i-ther (short for the latter). Perhaps the 'big bang' was really put in motion for the sole purpose by the supermind made up of this (supposed) subquantum level of reality known as i-ther aka dark energy to create the matter systems which our brain-minds perceive as reality. A disembodied single consciouness aka supermind/god consisting of this i-ther would have pre-existed the big bang. Just a thought.
Statistics: Posted by Paradox — 02 Jan 2011, 13:46
]]>
Statistics: Posted by absinthe_minded — 01 Sep 2010, 04:06
]]>
- They've already shown enzymes of photosynthesis and electron transport chain show some sort of quantum coherence. (wah waah woohh wahh)
I think that electronic resonance of the neurotransmitters Serotonin and Dopamine in the active site of their respective receptors plays a big role in Quantum Consciousness, and could explain where psi information transference can slip into the brain. It's also the most likely place for free will (I mean, where else would it occur? Apart from signal transduction and some random occurrence due to brownian motion, the brain is basically deterministic. Wahh wooh wah wuh. Naturalists already argue there is no free will.). I have a theory that free will is actually a form of micro-PK on your brain. Or rather, consciousness and matter interact in a non-trivial way, with some information transfer between the two modalities.
As for the no peer review/no way of experimenting this, aside from psi experiments, there is no way to test for consciousness. We can test the mechanism (see above), but we can't test the consciousness. Empirically, there is no difference between a and a person with consciousness. This has led some (idiot) skeptics (no one on this forum, I'm not calling names at anyone here
) to conclude that subjective consciousness doesn't actually exist. Clearly, they're wrong, to me at least. I can't prove to any of you guys I'm experience subjective consciousness, but I know I am. Reductionists HATE these sort paradoxes. I revel in them, because I think this train of thought is going to go down the road that it'll make it so that psi is seen as a necessary consequence of consciousness, just how entanglement arose as a necessary consequence of Quantum Mechanics, and was later demonstrated to be true. Otherwise, we're all meat computers, there is no free will, the universe is a pointless accidental quantum bloop (technically the occurrence of a virtual particle in a 0-dimensional space due to uncertainty, resulting in an energetic feedback loop that instantaneously created all the matter and energy in the universe, along with the spatial dimensions), there is no meaning of life, I'm only here right now because these are the only conditions that favored life, evolution, and sentience, and there isn't any point to anything, ever. Did I mention there isn't a point to anything under the reductionist paradigm?
Statistics: Posted by NucleicAcid — 29 Mar 2010, 07:32
]]>
]]>
]]>
]]>
]]>
]]>
]]>
Here is an appropriate YouTube video to accompany my comment:
Statistics: Posted by NinjaPuppy — 19 Mar 2010, 04:31
]]>
Apparently, the idea here is that effects that are observed because energy moves from place to place in fixed 'lumps' are important in consciousness. It also appears that so far all of this is conjecture and not a theory.
Statistics: Posted by Nostradamus — 18 Mar 2010, 23:53
]]>
Has anyone ever heard of this guy? How microtubules might have quantum effects. He was stating this might explain why during anaesthesia why we don’t remember anything, is because of how the microtubules processing in the neurons sort of shut down. I do not understand his theory full. Hopefully someone on here knows more. BTW he is an anaesthesiologist.
Statistics: Posted by Maddogkull — 18 Mar 2010, 04:37
]]>