When/ how did you become an atheist?

[Dywyddyr]

Because you dont have an elephant? duh.

Which is nothing to do with the point.
The premise (which you're assuming is incorrect) is to illustrate the probabilities involved.

Incorrect. Frame of reference I can draw conclusions from. There is no frame of reference to god or god not existing. There is a frame of reference we can use to logically conclude that there is most likely not an elephant in your room (for all the obvious reasons)

This would be wrong. Claims and attributes of god have been put forward. Granted the "frame of reference" for god is not of the same quality as that for an elephant (e.g. lack of evidence etc) but nevertheless it exists. It's what churches are founded upon.

 

[420Joey]

That would be incorrect.
The reason that we "didn't have evidence" for evolution (we in fact did - in fact we're making use of that evidence) is that no-one thought to look. This is not the case with god. As I pointed out.

So were looking for something "un-natural" in our natural world. OK.

I just said my definition of god is consciousness, a "divine" source of intelligence that creates the illusion of "me" and in general perception. In this notion, I have looked 4 and have concluded that god exists based on the "laws" of science and the self evident truth that we exist.

 

[420Joey]

Which is nothing to do with the point.

Right which makes it a hyperbole.

This would be wrong. Claims and attributes of god have been put forward. Granted the "frame of reference" for god is not of the same quality as that for an elephant (e.g. lack of evidence etc) but nevertheless it exists. It's what churches are founded upon.

[/quote]

I take this as you saying that I didnt misuse the word and that you misunderstood the context. Case closed.

 

[Dywyddyr]

Right which makes it a hyperbole.

Still wrong.

I take this as you saying that I didnt misuse the word and that you misunderstood the context. Case closed.

Oops, wrong again. As shown.

 

[universaldistress]

So were looking for something "un-natural" in our natural world. OK.

I just said my definition of god is consciousness, a "divine" source of intelligence that creates the illusion of "me" and in general perception. In this notion, I have looked 4 and have concluded that god exists based on the "laws" of science and the self evident truth that we exist.

Evidence to support this is?

 

[Dywyddyr]

I just said my definition of god is consciousness, a "divine" source of intelligence that creates the illusion of "me" and in general perception. In this notion, I have looked 4 and have concluded that god exists based on the "laws" of science and the self evident truth that we exist.

Which "laws of science" would they be?
Where did god come from?

 

[universaldistress]

Hey D, I think he's got to give us a bit more than this. I for one want to hear his theory don't you?

 

[420Joey]

More fudging BS. I responded to:

Joey:

I said:


Trying to fudge the thread with more BS doesn't help your cause.

I did not say I dont believe in evolution. It co-exists with my theory of physical reality the way I understand it.

I dont believe in anything physical. I believe reality is digitally-based and god is the "emulator". I believe "everything" is a result of "our" physical senses, enviormental triggering of data exchange and god (the infinite range of possibility) which creates experience in a meaningful way or if you want to think of it as the universe experiencing itself in infinite arrays of focal perspectives to cover "every possibility" you can think of it that way.

I think after all the physical matter has expanded to every possibility this contigent matter created intervals of time (due to its onward expansion) contained in arrays of universes as "units" of a measurement with no coordinates.

Due to the expansion or motion the eventual consequence would be an "overlapping of layers" after a certain point creating consciousness to experience or "create" reality so it could instantaneously 'collapse the vaccum' or create based on this evolution of matter or god.

I believe evolution is a consequence of time and contigent matter in constant motion (following certain laws created to ensure the survival of experience) and this is a deliberate action of "god" to "experience" in a more meaningful way the emulation. It's like an emulator playing roms versus a simulation of nothing or everything. The universe does not have to be as uniform as it appears and its not, its just the illusion. I think that every type of reality exists and that we will "experience" every one. In increments of time to provide temporary meaning to physical reality which would be negated if we truly understood anything.

Again im not exclusive to any belief and I dont ascertain this as the truth. Its my best guess or "belief" versus stating I dont know. Its a given we dont know.

I believe because I think our thoughts are powerful + pascals wager it makes me think the moment I die my ultimate will is going to transfer me to a favorable experience

 

[universaldistress]

I did not say I dont believe in evolution. It co-exists with my theory of physical reality the way I understand it.

I dont believe in anything physical. I believe reality is digitally-based and god is the "emulator". I believe "everything" is a result of "our" physical senses, enviormental triggering of data exchange and god (the infinite range of possibility) which creates experience in a meaningful way or if you want to think of it as the universe experiencing itself in infinite arrays of focal perspectives to cover "every possibility" you can think of it that way.

I think after all the physical matter has expanded to every possibility this contigent matter created intervals of time (due to its onward expansion) contained in arrays of universes as "units" of a measurement with no coordinates.

Due to the expansion or motion the eventual consequence would be an "overlapping of layers" after a certain point creating consciousness to experience or "create" reality so it could instantaneously 'collapse the vaccum' or create based on this evolution of matter or god.

I believe evolution is a consequence of time and contigent matter in constant motion (following certain laws created to ensure the survival of experience) and this is a deliberate action of "god" to "experience" in a more meaningful way the emulation. It's like an emulator playing roms versus a simulation of nothing or everything. The universe does not have to be as uniform as it appears and its not, its just the illusion. I think that every type of reality exists and that we will "experience" every one. In increments of time to provide temporary meaning to physical reality which would be negated if we truly understood anything.

Again im not exclusive to any belief and I dont ascertain this as the truth. Its my best guess or "belief" versus stating I dont know. Its a given we dont know.

I believe because I think our thoughts are powerful + pascals wager it makes me think the moment I die my ultimate will is going to transfer me to a favorable experience

You said we haven't proven god to exist. I said we have. Can you refute that? You are not required to 'believe' in evolution. You are required to acccept it as fact.

Thanks for the breakdown of your belief/theory. I will peruse it tomorrow as it is late now.

 

[420Joey]

I do accept it as fact sir.

Simply put I just believe in god as experience. It is more simple than to believe that one came from a fluke or matter than to all of us. Consciousness in a sterile universe is not needed. So if we simplify this in a meaninful way - we can come to understand that if we do not have a frame of reference - we cannot move foward meaningfully. I believe there is a god as the frame of reference for consciousness. I can't understand the purpose behind having consciousness in a sterile universe except than I conclude that the universe itself is alive through consciousness and that there has to be more. I just believe the mind is so powerful that one day we will manafacture reality like we do with dreams. I take this all as hints that physical reality is an illusion based on some quantum bonding of experience and focal points intertwined with the same type of contigent matter.

Quantum physics essentially states that everything is deprived from thoughts. From god? By god I mean - the first sense of matter that organized itself evolving to an extent on a cosmological scale and consciousness is some consequence of this evolution.


Is religion and god different? What is your definition of god? Don't worry you are most likely god, maybe everything is thats why we dont feel bad eating eachother Maybe we all just know life and death is more or less a game that doesent matter. I suspect that if we all were independant of reality that consciousness wouldent have been this organized, uniform andfollowinglaws. Actually let me ask you this,

If consciousness and physical reality (and the laws that it conforms to) is exclusive than consider what happens when we dream. Surely we are still conscious and we manafacture a reality within our own by a simple mental process alone. It doesent adhere to the laws in this physical reality. Than we wake up. Does that make any scientific sense when you really think about it??

How about those who lucid dream and control there enviorments in dreams, etc.?

I'll be eager to hear that response as to why it exists in the first place. Can evolution explain a complex level of consciousness to this extent? I suspect we are all one. That one is god. Universe, me, you, a blade of grass, and that perverted thought you have when you see a certain somebody, I think it's all god.


If reality was any different (If we knew god existed, if physical requirements were not in place for consciousness, all the usual arguments against) would life be meaningful in the way it is now??

Could you even imagine yourself as lets say a butterfly? Or a monkey? Do you think it would be as meaningful? I think it would to an extent. If you have no frame of reference surely death is something to be wanted. I mean, you fall asleep right??? Why wake up when you don't have to? Sounds sweet to me. I just dont think this is the case. I think we will resurface as this consciousness is all in the same fabric and we don't know what we will resurface as!We cant experience "death"inevolution just sleepwhichis deprived from the construct. Hopefully we will be animated. This is what god is about. It's about will + experience which isnt neccessitated by evolution

Isnt it perfectly balanced, can you think of how you would be otherwise?? If things were even a little different, suppose everybody always got what they want, wouldent it defeat the purpose of want and render the associated feelings null untill pain and happiness was synomonus?

 

[Dywyddyr]

Quantum physics essentially states that everything is deprived from thoughts.

Do you mean "derived"?
In which case: no it doesn't.

Surely we are still conscious and we manafacture a reality within our own by a simple mental process alone.

No we aren't and no we don't.

 

[universaldistress]

sorry scratch my last post. let me repost here as I made a booboo :S

You said we haven't proven evolution to exist. I said we have. Can you refute that? You are not required to 'believe' in evolution. You are required to acccept it as fact.

Thanks for the breakdown of your belief/theory. I will peruse it tomorrow as it is late now.

 

[420Joey]

I didnt say we havent proven evolution to exist I said before the time of darwin. It was cuz dwy said that we havent found evidence of god yet in short I'm saying evolution is real but took awhile to find out.

Quantum physics proves experience is thought!
Experience or consciousness is matter evolving to the capacity of singularity where we can manafacture our own reality so when the vaccum collapses we wont even realize it becuase matter has evolved to another form (besides physical gas water, etc.) consciousness? Maybe ;0

 

[universaldistress]

I didnt say we havent proven evolution to exist I said before the time of darwin. It was cuz dwy said that we havent found evidence of god yet in short I'm saying evolution is real but took awhile to find out.

Quantum physics proves experience is thought!
Experience or consciousness is matter evolving to the capacity of singularity where we can manafacture our own reality so when the vaccum collapses we wont even realize it becuase matter has evolved to another form (besides physical gas water, etc.) consciousness? Maybe ;0

I will take it as a slip of the tongue then, or an assumption of context overlap that wasn't made clear (I won't be going back to nitpick the line further), no worries. I can see your views now.

I think QP is very incomplete, and I personally do not buy a lot of the interpretations of QP. It is still a field of many unknowns.

Let me take a look at your ideas tomorrow and I will come back to you on them.

 

[Dywyddyr]

Quantum physics proves experience is thought!

Experience is thought?
Quantum physics says this?
Links please.

 

[universaldistress]

Experience is thought?
Quantum physics says this?
Links please.

I think he is referring to the fact observing SEEMS to alter the behaviour of particles.

 

[Dywyddyr]

Yeah, that's why I asked for links. I suspect he's looked at one "explanation" of quantum physics and taken it absolute truth.

 

[universaldistress]

Yeah, that's why I asked for links. I suspect he's looked at one "explanation" of quantum physics and taken it absolute truth.

Yep, yep. QP is still full of unknowns. To fix it down when it hasn't really been understood enough yet for alternative interpretations to be blown out the water, is a bit assumptive.

 

[420Joey]

Okay.
*Gasps for air*

Observation collapses wave function, this hopefully we all can agree, this is how "things" appear physical.

Anwser these questions:

Could things as they appear be probabilities of inumerable alternative states, why not? The particle we observe is just one form of many it could have appeared in. (Principle of uncertainty or whatever)

Science basically says that considering another form is immaterial as we can never observe the alternative forms. OK, does this mean its the only "physical" possibility or the only one our senses can communicate in a data "dialouge" with.

This line of thinking is how science rationalizes the physical universe as an absolute one despite Quantum Mecanics implication there is no absolte. I say non existent because without observation, there is no way to know what exists in what form subject to what or who is experiencing and possibly based on biological senses in some web of entanglement.

We cannot detect what we do not observe. Entanglement assures us of this. This applies to energy, space, and time as well as matter, including the matter of our physical form. Since onsevation collapses wave function in the instant we observe, how do we always appear the same way to ourselves and others? I try to reconcile this by thinking increments of time contained in universe (motion that willeventually expire,extinguishitself from energy/entropy)

You can see, hear, touch, smell, and taste things in this reality. This is absolute reality then, correct? How is this even possible however when all the experience you have of physical reality only ever becomes experience when your "brain" gives it recognition and definition? What you are so conditioned to accepting as objective experiense can actually only ever be subjective experience. Since your sensory observations are really just subjective ones, how can you know for certain anything physical even exists? Because of uniformity. This has to include the physical identity you have of yourself, which includes the brain. Yes, we do know we have experience of our identity and physical reality. I am just saying we don't have it the way we think. If we can only make things appear physical in the instant of observation then when we are not observing we cannot be sure these things exist physically. Both Quantum Mechasnics and Physiology confirm this. How then do we observe ourselves? How can we create the collapse of wave function that causes our identity to become physical in that instant of observation? I am suggesting we cant, and therefore require an Observer to "collapse our wave function". What collapses gods wave function???

Its reconciled by the emergance of physical reality other elements in this little theory (the reason why consciousness is divided by an array for focal points for instance) is used to collapse the wave functions of oneself (God) to conform to the laws consciousness was based on in this web of entanglement as one possible state reality canbe based on.

Observation collapses wave function in the instant of observation to appear as matter in a specific state. QED clearly shows that that state of matter is in a perpetual, yet instantaneous cycle of materializing as matter and anti matter then converting back to energy, then materializing as matter-anti matter, and converting back to energy, etc. with the interaction of a photon at each conversion. The problem is that both the obsewravation and what is observed as matter "occur" instataneously.

Maybe im stupid or too into video games but QP just indicates to me that there is a huge source code like a OP system and that anything is possible (the programs) reality just seems digitally basedand andgod has to be theemulator I think

 

[Dywyddyr]

Observation collapses wave function, this hopefully we all can agree, this is how "things" appear physical.

No.
Do try to read up on things.
Herr Schrödinger's cat for one, and the various other possible explanations. Start here.

The particle we observe is just one form of many it could have appeared in. (Principle of uncertainty or whatever)

And you appear to be ignorant of the uncertainty principle, too.

We cannot detect what we do not observe. Entanglement assures us of this.

And entanglement.

If we can only make things appear physical in the instant of observation then when we are not observing we cannot be sure these things exist physically. Both Quantum Mechasnics and Physiology confirm this.

Neither "confirm" this.

How then do we observe ourselves? How can we create the collapse of wave function that causes our identity to become physical in that instant of observation? I am suggesting we cant, and therefore require an Observer to "collapse our wave function".

Then why does this hypothetical observer not collapse all wave functions, leaving none for us to collapse?