What is consciousness

[Little Bang]

I don't understand Q, why do you say that is my understanding of superposition wrong.

[sinewave]

Conscious thinking is the creation of discontinuous artificial separateness, as ‘objects’, allowing relational abstract manipulation between internal symbols and the swapping of symbols we call ‘communication’, but all which is communicated is entirely abstractions, for there are not actually physically separate objects, and thus no actual communication or something real has occurred.

 

Dreams and fantasies are constructed on the same basis, though informally constructed.

 

You are reading symbols which deny the validity of the symbols.

 

Thus no need for denials or refutation.

 

 

*explodes to one*

[MEL555]

Conscious thinking is the creation of discontinuous artificial separateness, as ‘objects’, allowing relational abstract manipulation between internal symbols and the swapping of symbols we call ‘communication’, but all which is communicated is entirely abstractions, for there are not actually physically separate objects, and thus no actual communication or something real has occurred.

 

Dreams and fantasies are constructed on the same basis, though informally constructed.

 

You are reading symbols which deny the validity of the symbols.

 

Thus no need for denials or refutation.

 

 

*explodes to one*

really?

the abstract is the detail. jk

ho ho ho

.

[Little Bang]

Mel, I can't believe you actually understod that because I sure don't.

[Qfwfq]

Don't overly worry Little Bang, if you didn't! :hihi:

 

I don't understand Q, why do you say that is my understanding of superposition wrong.

Ask Schrödinger's cat. :eek:

 

I didn't really say that it is actually wrong. How plausible is it for the states of all the particles involved to be, and remain, coherent?

[sinewave]

heh, you either get it immediately, or never.

[R_Lee_E]

The thought occured to me soon before I discovered the science was already in its infancy. Since then quantum consciousness has been a topic of intense personal debate. Might I suggest "The Physics of Consciousness" by Evan Harris Walker. It does well to support the Quantum Consciousness theory - providing actual numbers for new terms such as, 'consciousness bit rates', 'consciousness data streams', etc. - and it almost takes a stab at a Theory of Everything. This book pulled me back from my prior self, the almost fully athiest me, and has made me agnostic again.

 

As for my thoughts on the theory: It sits well, and with time may come to be as sturdy, and percievable as the Big Bang theory. Though, for most people - those without professor-level mathematics skills - as with myself, it requires a bit of faith. And when faith is in play, I take the agnostic approach... always. Even when physicists play with the notion in their heads - like many of the big, important sciences - they to are required to show a little faith to believe. Though I must admit, the same interest has inflated my spirituality. Agnostic and spiritual, is that allowed?

[Southtown]

Agnostic and spiritual, is that allowed?

Agnostic is indifferent. I think that qualifies as the antithesis of spiritual.

[geokker]

Agnosticism is a prerequisite for professional spiritualism just as atheism is for TV evangelism.

 

;-)

[Tormod]

Might I suggest "The Physics of Consciousness" by Evan Harris Walker.

 

I particularly like the full title of the theory:

 

QUANTUM THEORY OF CONSCIOUSNESS©

 

...any theory that has a copyright symbol in it must really struggle to be taken carefully. :lol: