Which side of a coin is the true side, heads or tails? Reminds me of a wonderful Twilight Zone episode in which a young bank teller, after buying a newspaper, begins to hear the thoughts of others. He hears that an elderly worker in the bank is planning to rob it. He reports this and chaos ensues resulting in the young man getting carted away. Before he goes, the elderly man tells him that he's been thinking of robbing the bank every day for 60 years. Then flash back to where the young man purchased his newspaper. The coin he used to buy it is resting on its edge.
________________________________ From: Xenophaneros Anartaxius <anartax...@yahoo.com> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2013 8:06 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: SELF-HYPNOTIZE: Channel, End Negativity, Feel Good, Achieve Goals Dr. Shelley S --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Jason" <jedi_spock@...> wrote: > > --- Share Long <sharelong60@> wrote: > > > > > > Salyavin, I still think all this has something to do with WHOLE brain > > > functioning. I still think either there's no brain that does this and > > > or science doesn't have instruments to measure such. I postulate that > > > if both of these happened, it would be obvious that consciousness gives > > > rise to matter. > > > > > > > --- "salyavin808" <fintlewoodlewix@> wrote: > > > > I think the phrase "whole brain functioning" refers to the > > communication of different parts of the brain with each other. > > TM scientists claim that doing TM improves the way the left > > and right hemispheres work together making us more mentally > > flexible. > > > > It doesn't extend to the atoms or molecules that make up the > > cells in your brain. They just pass the electromagnetic impulses > > along. > > > > > > Am I totally brain washed?! > > > > I doubt it, but the new agers are so full of shit they want > > you to believe so they can justify their latest BS quantum > > chakra rebalancing course that it's tricky to sort the wheat > > from the chaff, especially now the internet has proved itself > > such a fertile breeding ground for nonsense. > > > > > > Allow me to rephrase the topic. > > Judy's thesis is this. There is a dark room. You are inside > it in darkness. There is bright light outside. The windows > are covered with blinds with no light coming in. > > You slowly open it a little bit with very dim light coming > in. Later you let some more light come in. it's brighter. > Again later you allow a little more light to come in. > > The room slowly become brighter and brighter until it's > fully illuminated from the light outside. > > Salyawin's thesis is this. You are in a dark room. You > have a bulb and very tiny batteries. You connect the > batteries to the bulb and get a very dim light. > > Later, you connect it to a bigger set of batteries and the > light is slightly brighter. A little later, you connect it > to a even larger battery and so on. > > The room becomes brighter and brighter untill it's fully > illuminated with powerfull batteries. > > Which is could be correct? > > If consciousness is an emergent phenomena that comes from > the ability to sense the outside universe, it would need the > hardware. It would be objective. > > If consciousness came from the intelligence of the totality > of nature's laws, it's a software issue. The Qualia aspect > of reality is interesting. It's subjective. > > Bring it on, Xeno Taxius, Judy, Salyawin. > Which side of a coin is the true side, heads or tails? > > > > > ________________________________ > > > From: salyavin808 <fintlewoodlewix@> > > > Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2013 6:57 AM > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: SELF-HYPNOTIZE: Channel, End Negativity, > > > Feel Good, Achieve Goals Dr. Shelley S > > > > > > > > > > > > --- "sparaig" <LEnglish5@> wrote: > > > > > > > > What is consciousness? > > > > > > > > Tononi's Integrated Information Theory asserts that the level > > > > consciousness depends on a certain sophistication in the interaction of > > > > parts of a system. People point out that this means that even rocks are > > > > conscious, but Tononi doesn't like that interpretation and tries to > > > > make exceptions so that his theory can't be interpreted that way. > > > > > > Why doesn't he just dump the whole stupid thing and be done with it? > > > > > > > Even so, the level of interaction at the vacuum state is such that you > > > > can't deny a certain consciousness-like aspect to that particuar system. > > > > > > Except that it isn't conscious in any meaningful way. > > > > > > > What is fun, is that in the early moments of the universe, the universe > > > > was so small that you could think of it as one single system that > > > > interacted fast enough due to its small size, that the entire thing > > > > could be seen as one system. > > > > > > For almost a trillionth of a second, yes. This is the same thing > > > Hagelin uses to justify astrology and reading tea leaves. It is BS > > > that it means anything of the sort or consciousness or anything > > > other than a bunch of hot whirly bits that know nothing about > > > themselves or each other. > > > > > > > Interestingly enough, MMY describes the loss of consciousness of the > > > > entire system as the time at which matter and energy manifest, and in > > > > fact, at a certain point in the expansion of the universe, it cooled > > > > due to expansion to the point that what we call normal matter and > > > > energy came to be. So the universe got too big for the entire thing to > > > > communicate in a conscious way somewhere along the same time that > > > > matter and energy manifested. > > > > > > > > Fascinating. I wonder if he had that description in mind all along when > > > > he worded things that way in his description of Vedic Cosmology. > > > > > > > > > > > > L > > > > > > > > >
