Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Contractor
Boulder climber
CA
|
|
|
Feb 12, 2018 - 10:01pm PT
|
Not really- that's another snap shot in my opinion. Perhaps one's self described (or claimed) genisis of awareness has no bearing on the actual amplitude. What's the penalty for being wrong here? Is my journey over at 51?
|
|
Largo
Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
|
|
|
Feb 13, 2018 - 09:26am PT
|
Not really- that's another snap shot in my opinion.
Then what ARE you saying, contractor? Lest one be specific, you leave people guessing about what you are trying to say. At least they are taking you seriously. Snarky comments about self-claimed genius of awareness feel like trolling to me, but I'll certainly sit corrected if you clarify your position.
If you want to see how awareness effects brain and body, get an outdoor thermometer for 15 bucks, tape the sensor to your finger and try and raise the temp in your finger - a standard biofeedback drill. Pay no attention to the exercise and just mind wander. Then pay attention (without trying to DO anything) and see what happens.
|
|
Contractor
Boulder climber
CA
|
|
|
Feb 13, 2018 - 11:29am PT
|
Oh, not snarky at all- you read genius and I actually wrote Genesis- big difference in context from my end.
I typically don't make declarative or disparaging statements about someone's spirituality or lack thereof- unlike the OP.
I personally would assume that many people, like myself, that rely on physicalism are open to alternate dimensions of existence, however; we may not be inclined to seek it by nature. That's not to deny that the connection may not occur at some point in time.
I certainly don't join in on these discussions to disprove anyone's belief's.
|
|
Contractor
Boulder climber
CA
|
|
|
Feb 13, 2018 - 11:42am PT
|
BTW- claimed Genesis would equally refer to me and my belief's.
|
|
Largo
Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
|
|
|
Feb 13, 2018 - 05:09pm PT
|
Sorry, Contractor. My old friend and mentor, Jim Bridwell, is on life support and dying (basically dead already) and IT'S ME who is feeling snarky. Didn't think it would work me so hard.
|
|
Contractor
Boulder climber
CA
|
|
|
Feb 13, 2018 - 05:29pm PT
|
These are the times that leave me trusting in transcendence. Peace be with him and you.
|
|
zBrown
Ice climber
|
|
|
Feb 13, 2018 - 08:19pm PT
|
Atom this eve?
A single strontium atom with what level of consciousness?
https://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--EFNrnAww--/c_scale,fl_progressive,q_80,w_800/hyejinr2kjmfu74vfqrz.png
It can be read about here:
https://www.techly.com.au/2018/02/13/stunning-photo-single-atom-wins-prestigious-science-photography-contest/
Just as there are 50 some words for snow among Eskimos (how do they talk about that to a guy who lives in the desert?), how many words are there for atom among physicists?
Meanwhile back at the lab.
While reports of EEG correlates of psychiatric disorders date back five decades, clinical sensitivity of the EEG to psychiatric disorders has been greatly enhanced with the advent of quantitative methods of analysis (QEEG). Using a QEEG methodology known as neurometrics we have identified distinctive electrophysiological profiles associated with different psychiatric disorders. With this method quantitative features are extracted from 2 minutes of artifact- free eyes closed resting EEG data, log transformed to obtain Gaussianity, age-regressed, and Z-transformed relative to population norms. Using small subsets of neurometric features, multiple stepwise discriminant analyses were used to construct mathematical classifier functions, the values of which are different for members of different a priori defined diagnostic groups. Using this approach, we have demonstrated high discriminant accuracy in independent replications separating many populations of psychiatric patients from normal as well as from each other, including major affective disorder, schizophrenia, dementia, alcoholism, and learning disabilities, as well as high accuracy of discrimination between known subtypes of depression (unipolar vs bipolar). The use of classification accuracy curves (CACs) which allow one to assess the sensitivity and specificity achieved by the discriminant functions is discussed. In addition, using cluster analysis, neurometric subtypes can be identified in several clinically homogenous populations. Preliminary results suggest that baseline membership in some neurometric subtypes may be highly correlated with response to treatment
Caveat
That very same discrimination analysis is able to derive a discriminant function on the criterion classes Male and Female based upon driver's license numbers data.
Caveat 2
Preliminary results often remain just that
What in the heck is Mind, preliminarily.
|
|
TomCochrane
Trad climber
Cascade Mountains and Monterey Bay
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 14, 2018 - 10:58pm PT
|
Reality is all about vibration and frequency, as pointed out by Nicola Tesla with implications and techniques long kept secret.
(Einstein was supported and promoted by the Rothschilds to obscure some of the core issues from the general scientific community.)
Light behaves as waves in 'empty' space, until bent by magnetic fields.
When the light waves are bent by magnetic fields, the interference between the bent light waves produces interference fringes between the conflicting wave patterns.
So that the nodes between interfering wave forms become what we understand to be particles of physical matter.
It seems what we perceive as the physical universe is constructed of frozen light ... analogous to a hologram.
Our minds can not directly perceive the physical universe, but depend upon our senses.
And our senses are not nearly good enough to build the internal visual world that we perceive as reality (i.e. The Matrix).
Our senses transfer electromagnetic signals along nerve bundles into our brain. These EM signals are transformed within the brain to guide the creation of our holographic world of thought that we relate to as reality.
Thus a complex pattern of light waves are conveyed electro-magnetically into our brains by our senses and translated into holographic realities within our minds. We relate to these holograms as if they are real ... which they are to us.
However there is no solid physical reality out there. There is light and magnetism and our perception of it as hologram patterns.
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
|
Feb 15, 2018 - 06:29am PT
|
Thanks Tom,
your posts remind me HOW GRATEFUL I AM! to have both a general education and a physics, electrical engineering, and neuroscience education; otherwise I couldn't keep up!
Mind your nodes and frequencies. Damn those Rothchilds too! :)
...
Dang it, Dingus, I went for the coffee and you beat me to the post!!!
lol
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
|
Feb 15, 2018 - 06:47am PT
|
Yeah. It's only the basis of radio, eg, or light and vision, or hearing, or quantum mechanics. Or physical chemistry. Or... That's all.
But I suspect this link between Einstein and the Rothchilds has long ago been destroyed?
|
|
Largo
Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
|
|
|
Feb 15, 2018 - 08:31am PT
|
Secret frequencies, holograms, light waves, little green men ... you're still arguing over WHAT we perceive, are still one step away from perception itself, which does not necessarily hinge on our sense organs.
For example, get a pair of those noise canceling headphones that people use on construction sites, which make it so you hear nothing at all. Put those on. Lay down and pull a thin blanket over yourself. Put a dark cloth over your eyes. To a large extent, almost entirely, you have eliminated most all of your physical sense data, especially once you have relaxed for a bit and remain still. Now, settle into simply experiencing what is transpiring and being as alert as possible. At some point the duality between he who observes and just observing will melt away, and so does the distance, duality between you and it. So does the duality between awareness and what you are aware of. And so dies the illusion that "you only think you are perceiving" in whatever manner you are because thinking has already become background phenomenon. This is not "intuitive" exploration because you are not focused on some thing or phenomenon "out there" which you can be wrong about.
Then you stop and start working up rational models, not from bits and pieces, but rather from the whole mo fo.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Feb 15, 2018 - 08:37am PT
|
you're still arguing over WHAT we perceive, are still one step away from perception itself
They CAN"T do that.
They ARE soooo brainwashed with their boxed up limited selves in their tiny little limited sterile world.
If Pinker or Sam Harris says they will come running like monkeys and eat those bananas like they are god himself ......
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Feb 15, 2018 - 08:43am PT
|
Or just use isolation tanks and do repeated 6-12 hour sessions in them to cut straight to the heart of the matter. However, what 'rational models' and general mo fo you then come away from the experience with is clearly quite subjective.
|
|
Reilly
Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
|
|
|
Feb 15, 2018 - 09:58am PT
|
All vibrations and frequencies. I find it fascinating.
Me too, and I would elaborate on it, in private. The KGB, being more open minded than their
crankloon American counterparts, did lots of research into this ‘stuff’.
|
|
Largo
Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
|
|
|
Feb 15, 2018 - 10:27am PT
|
Or just use isolation tanks and do repeated 6-12 hour sessions in them to cut straight to the heart of the matter. However, what 'rational models' and general mo fo you then come away from the experience with is clearly quite subjective.
I warned about conflating. The two most common ones are conflating content with awareness, and subjective with objective.
For example, you have a subjective experience of sitting quietly and simply observing your experience without trying to define or describe or quantify it in any way. This is the exploration phase. It is the existential equal of "listening" to reality as opposed to yet defining it.
Later, when you start rationally interpreting your experience, you are building a cognitive and logical map to same. We can clearly see that the process of building said map, and the subjective territory that it seeks to explain, are not selfsame. That is, the map (interpretation) itself is an attempt to objectify subjectivity, and is not, itself, subjective.
In perceptual or mind terms, the former (exploration) is best carried out with a wide focus (note that in wide or panorama focus, you can't interpret). Then later, we narrow focus and our rational minds kick in.
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Feb 15, 2018 - 10:32am PT
|
Crikey, you really are an arrogant sob. There's no 'conflating' going on and you've whipped the poor content and map horses to bone powder. That and your commentary on 'proper' methods and what can and cannot be done now borders on just another mindlessly arrogant rant of [subjective] opinion.
|
|
Contractor
Boulder climber
CA
|
|
|
Feb 15, 2018 - 12:08pm PT
|
OP-It seems what we perceive as the physical universe is constructed of frozen light ... analogous to a hologram. would this include fire?
This is not to cross examine- just wanting you to elaborate. Frozen light refers to the trapping of photons. Our perception is based on an electrochemical signal produced by the reflection of light.
|
|
Largo
Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
|
|
|
Feb 15, 2018 - 12:39pm PT
|
Healje, if I was presenting this information by way of equations, I wouldn't be an "arrogant SOB." What you and others take issue with is not the particulars, but rather the tone most take with science, when it is applied to the subjective adventures. Of course I'm doing it on purpose.
But lets look closely at your claim that there is "no conflating going on with the following sentence (yours):
"Or just use isolation tanks and do repeated 6-12 hour sessions in them to cut straight to the heart of the matter. However, what 'rational models' and general mo fo you then come away from the experience with is clearly quite subjective."
"Rational models" are build by way of a cognitive exercise in which we try and objectify a given phenomenon. Workable models in this regards aim at being objectively accurate.
For example, I have the experience of climbing Crack of Doom. Later, reflecting on the experience, I attempt to cook up some rational models in terms of describing particular features on the route the belays, the difficulty of the crux bits, and finally chart out a map, in this case, a topo map.
That is, I "come away from the experience" of climbing Crack of Doom, start building my "rational models" by way of objectification, resulting at last in a topo map loaded with quantifications (ratings, etc).
Now you are free to say said topo ITSELF (an external object full of quantifications) is "clearly quite subjective" in terms of the ratings ascribed to the topo, though we can't possibly say that either the paper the top is written on, nor yet the data on the paper itself, IS subjective. Subjective in this case only refers to methods used for quantification, and some of those are not subjective.
If for example, I arrive at the belay at the marked mid point on my 70 meter rope, I know the pitch is basically 35 meters long. What's more, my approximation of the grade might be based on a norm derived from 1,000s of other routes I have experienced. Though peer review we arrive at a rating that is not strictly subjective.
What is also conflated ("combining two or more ideas into one") in your rant is the business of inductive and deductive reasoning, which more accurately captures what I believe you are driving at.
Either way, if you want to make a point about this slippery slope, it has little chance of sticking unless it is very specific and logically coherent. Otherwise the key stuff gets conflated and its just one big gumbo. The slipshod way you have it, it is impossible to derive any objective data from subjective experience itself, which is partially true about WHAT we experience, but not at all true about perception itself. It's just that the methods of building our rational model are primarily inductive.
|
|
MH2
Boulder climber
Andy Cairns
|
|
|
Feb 15, 2018 - 02:56pm PT
|
you're still arguing over WHAT we perceive, are still one step away from perception itself, which does not necessarily hinge on our sense organs.
Your noise-cancellation blanket-over scenario does not take into account that your perception is affected by your memories. If you had no sense organs from the moment of your birth, what would your perception be like? Would it be like the isolation tank?
It is a trick question.
You are yourself still working with bits and pieces, just like the rest of us. However, you could improve on how you put those bits and pieces together.
|
|
TomCochrane
Trad climber
Cascade Mountains and Monterey Bay
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 15, 2018 - 03:20pm PT
|
Hey, folks, I really appreciate all of your contributions to this discussion!
I didn't start this thread in order to set myself up as a resident expert on these subjects. Rather to simply express my high level of interest. I have done quite a lot of study of a wide range of materials in attempts to improve my understanding of personal experiences. Your experiences may differ! LOL
One of the best things about my life has been the amazing people I have come to know and who have become friends and colleagues. From my perspective, many of my friends are much more intelligent than me. I have been following the 'What is mind?' thread with fascinated respect. So I was just hoping this thread could explore a bit further beyond the mechanics of the physiology of the brain/mind system, and that does seem to be happening here.
When I have been making a statement in this thread with some apparent degree of certainty, it represents my attempt to understand and paraphrase writings from scientists and philosophers with way more knowledge, research, and credentials than myself. Clearly this is challenging, for various obvious reasons.
There are two domains of knowledge that I have been avoiding bringing into this thread. One is material that I think may have merit, but hasn't been assimilated into my world view, sometimes labeled 'woo woo'. The second is material that I believe to be relevant, but is too controversial and distracting from the conversation I'm hoping to continue here...sometimes labeled 'conspiracy theories'. I am not trying to make these a restriction for you, but from my perspective these could derail this discussion.
I am also not trying to judge your world view or levels of awareness, just that I am interested. I am trying to lay out the map and modes of transportation and improve my understanding of such things
Once aspect that is very clear to me is that all I have managed to learn in a lifetime dedicated to my 'individually directed study program' is a small fraction of the wider domain that I have not yet been able to study or assimilate into my own domain of supposed understanding. So I hoped this thread might catch the attention of some of you to join a conversation that has been going on between myself and my shadow. So thank you very much for participating!
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!