PLato said,"Look to the perfection of the heavens for truth," while Aristotle said "look around you at what is, if you would know the truth" To Remember: Eskesthai
Anton Zeilinger heads up the IQOQI lab in Vienna. Photograph by Mark Mahaney.
Zeilinger and his group have only just begun to consider the grand implications of all their work for reality and our world. Like others in their field, they had focused on entanglement and decoherence to construct our future information technology, such as quantum computers, and not for understanding reality. But the group’s work on these kinds of applications pushed up against quantum mechanics’ foundations. To repeat a famous dictum, “All information is physical.” How we get information from our world depends on how it is encoded. Quantum mechanics encodes information, and how we obtain this through measurement is how we study and construct our world.Do we create the world just by looking at it?
Interesting question and article by Seed Magazine.
Professor Noam Chomsky, Massachusetts Institute of Technology: “The machine, the ghost, and the limits of understanding: Newton’s contributions to the study of mind” at the University of Oslo, September 2011. Q&A at 45:33
I push back on the limitations inferred by others so as to direct my mode of operation, “in a question form,” so as to move forward and not be stalled in my efforts. I believe I have made clear the difficulties as a logical directed outcome in presentation.
Internet development today asks how evolutionary consequence may be to influence forehead development( ahem……frontal cortex) when thought with regard to full brain used and direction is revealed in the keyboard displayed in the comment box. So while not being a cabby…..your a writer, a journalist. What MRI imaging would actually represent your correlative use of brain research information collection and pathway construction?
Chomsky refers back to this evolutionary inherent trait of human being identification in uteri manifestation. While referencing innate points of discussion it is interesting that such innateness may be limited to block of time or a frame of reference in the evolutionary development of that consciousness.
Chomsky discusses the euclidean direction of development toward the evoking apparent correlation in of historical development. While there is some difficulty as to pointing out this feature in the Amazon tribe child toward such comprehension. A triangle is used and it’s comprehension as to the lines of expression is explicit toward the imperfection of that triangle perceived.
Link above brought forward contradictory data in relation to the subject of innateness discussed by Chomsky.
There are a lot of things discussed that are included in the overall discussions I have had with others about how we perceive consciousness and perspectives shared by others that questions how it is that consciousness can be perceived apart from the body. How difficult it would be to make this measure if possible at all?
The empirical methodis generally taken to mean the approach of using a collection of data to base a theory or derive a conclusion in science. It is part of the scientific method, but is often mistakenly assumed to be synonymous with the experimental method. The empirical method is not sharply defined and is often contrasted with the precision of the experimental method, where data are derived from the systematic manipulation of variables in an experiment. Some of the difficulty in discussing the empirical method is from the ambiguity of the meaning of its linguist root: empiric.
The mind body problem is dismissed in this talk below as to demonstrate that the pathway to empirical methods had been established by Newton. For sake of clarity one would have to refer back to Chomsky video to clarify this issue and how we move forward in today’s world having arrive at a settled perspective about the mind body problem.
Further to this discussion in terms of the evolutionary the status quo of consciousness has not changed for 50000 years and example to help direct that perspective were raised in the contrast of a baby born in a tribe in the Amazon being raised in our modern day society and function quite well and a baby born in this modern society doing equally as well in the tribe.
Bold emphasized in order to provide a move toward this explanation outside of the NDE consideration… to see the theoretical position adopted and the attempts at an empirical method toward the development of that theory.
In the Q&A part of the lecture there is some correspondence in which a question is asked about this correlation of bits. Chomsky’s reference to Wheeler in that context.
Image: Event display of candidate event for this ultra-rare decay observed in the LHCb experiment
Scientists at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) at CERN, near Geneva, have spotted one of the rarest particle decays ever seen in nature. The result is very damaging to new theories like the extremely popular Supersymmetry (or SUSY for short).
Current knowledge about the most fundamental matter particles (quarks and leptons, such as an electron) and the forces between them is embedded in the so-called Standard Model. The particle masses are a consequence of their interactions with the Higgs field. Exciting the Higgs field in particle collisions at the LHC recently resulted in the discovery of the Higgs boson.
The worst thing about the BBC article is the headline, “Supersymmetry theory dealt a blow” (though that’s presumably the editor’s fault, as much as or more than the author’s) and the ensuing prose, “The finding deals a significant blow to the theory of physics known as supersymmetry.” What’s wrong with it? It’s certainly true that the measurement means that many variants of supersymmetry (of which there are a vast number) are now inconsistent with what we know about nature. But what does it mean to say a theory has suffered a blow? and why supersymmetry? See: “Supersymmetry Dealt a Blow”?
The graph showing evidence of the Bs0 → μ+ μ– decay. The result was presented Monday 12 November at the HCP Conference in Kyoto (photo courtesy of the LHCb Collaboration).
Today, at the Hadron Collider Physics Symposium in Kyoto, the LHCb collaboration has presented the evidence of a very rare B decay, the rarest ever seen. The result further shrinks the region in which scientists can still look for supersymmetry. See: A rare sight
A typical B0s →μμ decay candidate event is shown above. The two muon tracks from B0s decay are seen as a pair of purple tracks traversing the whole detector in the left image above.
The space policy of the Barack Obama administration was announced by U.S. President Barack Obama on April 15, 2010, at a major space policy speech at Kennedy Space Center.[1] He committed to increasing NASA funding by $6 billion over five years and completing the design of a new heavy-lift launch vehicle by 2015 and to begin construction thereafter. He also predicted a U.S. crewed orbital Mars mission by the mid-2030s, preceded by an asteroid mission by 2025. In response to concerns over job losses, Obama promised a $40 million effort to help Space Coast workers affected by the cancellation of the Space Shuttle program and Constellation program.
Any Problem with this type of video player player have a look here
Illustration of Artemis-P1 liberations orbits. Credit: NASA/Goddard
ARTEMIS-P1 is the first spacecraft to navigate to and perform stationkeeping operations around the Earth-Moon L1 and L2 Lagrangian points. There are five Lagrangian points associated with the Earth-Moon system. The two points nearest the moon are of great interest for lunar exploration. These points are called L1 (located between the Earth and Moon) and L2 (located on the far side of the Moon from Earth), each about 61,300 km (38,100 miles) above the lunar surface. It takes about 14 to 15 days to complete one revolution about either the L1 or L2 point. These distinctive kidney-shaped orbits are dynamically unstable and require weekly monitoring from ground personnel. Orbit corrections to maintain stability are regularly performed using onboard thrusters.
continued….
Other benefits of this first ever libration orbit mission include the investigation of lunar regions to provide a staging location for both assembly of telescopes or human exploration of planets and asteroids or even to serve as a communication relay location for a future lunar outpost. The navigation and control of the spacecraft will also provide NASA engineers with important information on propellant usage, requirements on ground station resources, and the sensitivity of controlling these unique orbits.
A contour plot of the effective potential due to gravity and the centrifugal force of a two-body system in a rotating frame of reference. The arrows indicate the gradients of the potential around the five Lagrange points — downhill toward them (red) or away from them (blue). Counterintuitively, the L4 and L5 points are the high points of the potential. At the points themselves these forces are balanced.
Lagrangian points L2 through L5 only exist in rotating systems, such as in the monthly orbiting of the Moon about the Earth. At these points, the combined attraction from the two masses is equivalent to what would be exerted by a single mass at the barycenter of the system, sufficient to cause a small body to orbit with the same period.
The Exploration Gateway Platform[1] is a design proposed by Boeing in December 2011 to drastically reduce the cost of Moon, NEA’s, or Mars missions by using components already designed to construct a refueling depot and servicing station located at one of the Earth–Moon Lagrange points, L1 or L2.[2] The system claims its cost savings based on an ability to be reused for multiple missions such as a launch platform for deep space exploration, robotic relay station for moon rovers, telescope servicing and a deep space practice platform located outside the Earth’s protective radiation belts.
A purple haze shows dark matter flanking the “Bullet Cluster.” Image Credit: X-ray: NASA/CXC/M.Markevitch et al. Optical: NASA/STScI; Magellan/U.Arizona/D.Clowe et al. Lensing Map: NASA/STScI; ESO WFI; Magellan/U.Arizona/D.Clowe et al
Strong gravitational lensing as observed by the Hubble Space Telescope in Abell 1689 indicates the presence of dark matter—enlarge the image to see the lensing arcs.
A gravitational lens is formed when the light from a very distant, bright source (such as a quasar) is “bent” around a massive object (such as a cluster of galaxies) between the source object and the observer. The process is known as gravitational lensing.
Dark matter affects galaxy clusters as well. X-ray measurements of hot intracluster gas correspond closely to Zwicky’s observations of mass-to-light ratios for large clusters of nearly 10 to 1. Many of the experiments of the Chandra X-ray Observatory use this technique to independently determine the mass of clusters.[32]
The galaxy cluster Abell 2029 is composed of thousands of galaxies enveloped in a cloud of hot gas, and an amount of dark matter equivalent to more than 1014 Suns. At the center of this cluster is an enormous, elliptically shaped galaxy that is thought to have been formed from the mergers of many smaller galaxies.[33] The measured orbital velocities of galaxies within galactic clusters have been found to be consistent with dark matter observations.
Another important tool for future dark matter observations is gravitational lensing. Lensing relies on the effects of general relativity to predict masses without relying on dynamics, and so is a completely independent means of measuring the dark matter. Strong lensing, the observed distortion of background galaxies into arcs when the light passes through a gravitational lens, has been observed around a few distant clusters including Abell 1689 (pictured right).[34] By measuring the distortion geometry, the mass of the cluster causing the phenomena can be obtained. In the dozens of cases where this has been done, the mass-to-light ratios obtained correspond to the dynamical dark matter measurements of clusters.[35]
A technique has been developed over the last 10 years called weak gravitational lensing, which looks at minute distortions of galaxies observed in vast galaxy surveys due to foreground objects through statistical analyses. By examining the apparent shear deformation of the adjacent background galaxies, astrophysicists can characterize the mean distribution of dark matter by statistical means and have found mass-to-light ratios that correspond to dark matter densities predicted by other large-scale structure measurements.[36] The correspondence of the two gravitational lens techniques to other dark matter measurements has convinced almost all astrophysicists that dark matter actually exists as a major component of the universe’s composition.
The Bullet Cluster: HST image with overlays. The total projected mass distribution reconstructed from strong and weak gravitational lensing is shown in blue, while the X-ray emitting hot gas observed with Chandra is shown in red.
The most direct observational evidence to date for dark matter is in a system known as the Bullet Cluster. In most regions of the universe, dark matter and visible material are found together,[37] as expected because of their mutual gravitational attraction. In the Bullet Cluster, a collision between two galaxy clusters appears to have caused a separation of dark matter and baryonic matter. X-ray observations show that much of the baryonic matter (in the form of 107–108Kelvin[38] gas, or plasma) in the system is concentrated in the center of the system. Electromagnetic interactions between passing gas particles caused them to slow down and settle near the point of impact. However, weak gravitational lensing observations of the same system show that much of the mass resides outside of the central region of baryonic gas. Because dark matter does not interact by electromagnetic forces, it would not have been slowed in the same way as the X-ray visible gas, so the dark matter components of the two clusters passed through each other without slowing down substantially. This accounts for the separation. Unlike the galactic rotation curves, this evidence for dark matter is independent of the details of Newtonian gravity, so it is claimed to be direct evidence of the existence of dark matter.[38] Another galaxy cluster, known as the Train Wreck Cluster/Abell 520, appears to have an unusually massive and dark core containing few of the cluster’s galaxies, which presents problems for standard dark matter models.[39]
This may be explained by the dark core actually being a long, low-density dark matter filament (containing few galaxies) along the line of sight, projected onto the cluster core.[40] The observed behavior of dark matter in clusters constrains whether and how much dark matter scatters off other dark matter particles, quantified as its self-interaction cross section. More simply, the question is whether the dark matter has pressure, and thus can be described as a perfect fluid.[41] The distribution of mass (and thus dark matter) in galaxy clusters has been used to argue both for[42] and against[43] the existence of significant self-interaction in dark matter. Specifically, the distribution of dark matter in merging clusters such as the Bullet Cluster shows that dark matter scatters off other dark matter particles only very weakly if at all.[44]
Professor Rosalind W. Picard, ScD is founder and director of the Affective Computing research group at the MIT Media Lab, co-director of the Things That Think consortium, and leader of the new and growing Autism & Communication Technology Initiative at MIT. In April 2009 she co-founded Affectiva, Inc., where she serves as chairman and chief scientist.
You have to understand we use matter defined things in order to measure how the brain can manifest certain rythmns to establish correlated focus. Focus levels not just found in sleep time, which can be experience in the day time as well?
Sensor development, helps to direct attention as to how emotion is demonstrated? Skin Conductance while demonstrate to be measured in one sense …I might say that the response in the psychological and physiological consideration may be seen as if the MRI would showing the neurons…. how else would this be measured that does not smack of the auras that one would quickly jump too in thought?
Skin conductance response in regular subjects differs when given fair and unfair offers, respectively. However, psychopaths have been shown to have no difference in skin conductance between fair and unfair offers.[2] This may indicate that the use of lie detectors relying on skin conductivity gives psychopaths an advantage that non-psychopaths do not have in criminal investigations.
The quest for me understanding the method by which discussion evolved with Seth was of interest in regard to EU(emotional units) and UC(units of consciousness). This detailed to me the need for a foundation understanding of how consciousness worked. It’s emergent functionality with expression and remembrance. This is also where Karim Nader comes into the picture.
How would one measure focus levels and share some understanding toward that foundation approach? Gravity? How would one picture a cloud around biological demonstration of consciousness and one could have venture off into the occult. So focus levels become a correspondence to brain wave considerations?
Also the problem with identifying innateness as a parameter given to this life only and the evolutionary course of the souls expression.
“Your BS( belief structure) dictates the frame of reference established for your experience”….not just of the near death question, but life in general? Maybe this is a postulate in itself that can be expanded on? Taken to a irreducible summation then maybe we can go from there?
The only way the reference frame can be changed for an individual is if it is somehow knocked out of its loop. Paradigmatic changes as if concerted require revolutions of course and the idea that observations can play a role is a self indicating permission to individuals to allow themself to move away from what is holding the mind to its continuous loop.
Often the outlook on life changes and it does not again need the NDE experience just to show this is a natural function of “aha” moments and realizations that allow one to expand that potential to see life differently then they always have.
You know the opposition to speaking about things that require a greater perception has been lost in the fact that I have to keep pushing one to realize how absurd the examples are of when you try to sound as if you have it in the bag so to speak. It is just as bad as the perception you keep creating with your smoke, magic, and mirrors. As bad as securing oneself in the fact that what is spoken by the “Great Shermer” will help you as a seated perspective about the grasp you have on reality.
The point about Benoit and Taleb is to show how perception when not used to its full potential fails to see how the basis of perception has emergent properties that affect the paradigmatic frame of reference that one has always held too. With all this talk now I have made comparisons that regardless of the subject show components of what is natural in consciousness as to see that birth and death are really natural things held within our perspectives.
How would you deny the experience of an NDEr in another when this experience resides in oneself as well?
Joe Dispenza, D.C. has lectured in 24 countries on six continents, educating people about the role and function of the human brain. He has taught thousands of people how to reprogram their thinking through scientifically proven neuro-physiologic principles. As a result, this information has taught many individuals to reach their specific goals and visions by eliminating self-destructive habits. His approach, taught in a very simple method, creates a bridge between true human potential and the latest scientific theories of neuroplasticity. As an author of several scientific articles on the close relationship between the brain and the body, Dispenza ties information together to explain the roles these functions play in physical health and disease.
Kant argued that Euclidean geometry is synthesized on the basis of an a priori intuition of space. This proposal inspired much behavioral research probing whether spatial navigation in humans and animals conforms to the predictions of Euclidean geometry. However, Euclidean geometry also includes concepts that transcend the perceptible, such as objects that are infinitely small or infinitely large, or statements of necessity and impossibility. We tested the hypothesis that certain aspects of nonperceptible Euclidian geometry map onto intuitions of space that are present in all humans, even in the absence of formal mathematical education. Our tests probed intuitions of points, lines, and surfaces in participants from an indigene group in the Amazon, the Mundurucu, as well as adults and age-matched children controls from the United States and France and younger US children without education in geometry. The responses of Mundurucu adults and children converged with that of mathematically educated adults and children and revealed an intuitive understanding of essential properties of Euclidean geometry. For instance, on a surface described to them as perfectly planar, the Mundurucu’s estimations of the internal angles of triangles added up to ∼180 degrees, and when asked explicitly, they stated that there exists one single parallel line to any given line through a given point. These intuitions were also partially in place in the group of younger US participants. We conclude that, during childhood, humans develop geometrical intuitions that spontaneously accord with the principles of Euclidean geometry, even in the absence of training in mathematics. See: Flexible intuitions of Euclidean geometry in an Amazonian indigene group
Hundreds of circles, squares, and other geometric shapes once hidden by forest hint at a previously unknown ancient society that flourished in the Amazon, a new study says.
Satellite images of the upper Amazon Basin taken since 1999 have revealed more than 200 geometric earthworks spanning a distance greater than 155 miles (250 kilometers).
PLato said,"Look to the perfection of the heavens for truth," while Aristotle said "look around you at what is, if you would know the truth" To Remember: Eskesthai
PLato said,"Look to the perfection of the heavens for truth," while Aristotle said "look around you at what is, if you would know the truth" To Remember: Eskesthai
PLato said,"Look to the perfection of the heavens for truth," while Aristotle said "look around you at what is, if you would know the truth" To Remember: Eskesthai
PLato said,"Look to the perfection of the heavens for truth," while Aristotle said "look around you at what is, if you would know the truth" To Remember: Eskesthai
PLato said,"Look to the perfection of the heavens for truth," while Aristotle said "look around you at what is, if you would know the truth" To Remember: Eskesthai
PLato said,"Look to the perfection of the heavens for truth," while Aristotle said "look around you at what is, if you would know the truth" To Remember: Eskesthai
Dialogos of Eide 