Wooly Speculations on Consciousness and Time (for BarrelofM)

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
_Tarski
_Emeritus
Posts: 3059
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 7:57 pm

Wooly Speculations on Consciousness and Time (for BarrelofM)

Post by _Tarski »

BarrelofMonkeys wrote:

Tarski wrote:
For example, perhaps consciousness is an eternal connected reality in which we participate in a way that if understood would make death seem more like an ascent to a higher Self than descent into "oblivion" (whatever that is).

I should mention that my view of time (inspired by spacetime physics) make death a bit less monstrous.


Could you elaborate on that? Or start a new thread?


Well, I would be dishonest if I said that such speculations represent my view but.....let's let our imaginations go a bit:

In cognitive science, as well as in the common understanding, consciousness is associated with various abilities that allow us to navigate the word, to be aware in the sense of being able to deal with and talk about objects and situations in the world. This is, in principle, explainable in totally functionlaistic/physicalistic terms: brains, neural computations, language, etc.


On the other hand, there is an intuition that there is some basic aspect of consciousness that is not reducible to such considerations.
I think the intutions is that consciousness is a basic aspect of reality just as matter is a basic aspect. (personally I think our intuitions about material "stuff" are just as naïve as such intuitions about consciousness).

In any case, if one were to take the view that there is such a fundamental aspect of reality, "basic consciousness", then one could speculate on its forms. In some Hindu thought, the consciousness associated with individual human (or animal) egos is a certain state of this basic consciousness somehow separated out into individualities like droplets separated from the ocean. The Higher Self is like the ocean; it is a Self that we all somehow share and originate from --sort of like all matter originates in some primal eruption from some vacuum state. This is very fuzzy and wooly thinking in my opinion but it has a certain intuitive appeal and enjoys a popularity with newagers and even some scientists.

As for the thing about time, I was referring to the fact that in relativity theory, it is difficult to come up with a principled way to separate reality into a global future that hasn't happened and a past that has already happened. The set of all events, past and present is often treated as a whole atemporally existing real manifold. For each individual thought, action, or speach act of an individual person, there is a "past" (already partly in memory) and a "future" not yet in memory. For some reason, not well understood there is a sort of arrow of time which makes it appropriate to say that an event may cause what is on the future side but problematic to say that it causes what is on the past side (Tsuzuki would disagree). Causality is thought to point only in the so called "future direction" of the spacetime manifold. But, on the microscopic scale, we see no such preferred directionality. Past and future are on a more equal footing.

This "block universe picture has everything existing all at once so to speak. We might say that we don't stop existing when we die, it is just that our future selves are only in informational contact with the past part of our physical carreer--where now this whole carreer is the reality. This might be thought to create the illusion that something, our existence, is somehow escaping us.
But the block universe picture puts time on a more equal footing with space. So a smart ass might ask why should the fact that my physical being doesn't extend forever in the forward time direction be anymore disturbing than the fact that my physical being doesn’t extend forever in the upward direction (I am not infinitely tall!).

But this block spacetime picture makes it look like we are all fated--the future is already there. But then so far, I have ignored quantum mechanics. In quantum mechanics determinism seems to disappear in some important ways. Combining (general) relativity with quantum mechanics is something not yet achieved in physics so maybe this issue of fatalism in the block spacetime universe picture will be alleviated in future science or future philosophy.

So what is the take away lesson? Relax a bit about this death thing.
_Tarski
_Emeritus
Posts: 3059
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 7:57 pm

Post by _Tarski »

for the experts: I ignored the CMB frame thingy when I talked about principled division of spacetime inot past and future.
It would take a while to explain why I doubt that it is sufficiently principled for this philosophical purpose. Also, I also didn't discuss the difference between "past" and "absolute past"--there are smoe subtlies there too.


On the CBM frame:
http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=122701
Last edited by W3C [Validator] on Mon Jul 30, 2007 7:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
_Yoda

Post by _Yoda »

OK, Tarski....so for those of us who are NOT physics students....

You're saying that you believe there IS life after death....But none of us really can grasp what that type of life will be?

But we should take comfort in the fact that we will continue...in some form.
_Tarski
_Emeritus
Posts: 3059
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 7:57 pm

Post by _Tarski »

liz3564 wrote:OK, Tarski....so for those of us who are NOT physics students....

You're saying that you believe there IS life after death....But none of us really can grasp what that type of life will be?

But we should take comfort in the fact that we will continue...in some form.


I am just speculating for fun. The idea is that the universe (or multiverse) continues and this includes something basic which, while not life as such, and not our individuality, is still something about our nature that we fear losing (consciousness).
It like a drop of water getting slashed into existence into the air above the ocean. It fears the fall back into the ocean because it fears its very wateriness will end. LOL
But there is plenty of wateriness to go around obviously.
_KimberlyAnn
_Emeritus
Posts: 3171
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2007 2:03 pm

Post by _KimberlyAnn »

Tarski wrote:
liz3564 wrote:OK, Tarski....so for those of us who are NOT physics students....

You're saying that you believe there IS life after death....But none of us really can grasp what that type of life will be?

But we should take comfort in the fact that we will continue...in some form.


I am just speculating for fun. The idea is that the universe (or multiverse) continues and this includes something basic which, while not life as such, and not our individuality, is still something about our nature that we fear losing (consciousness).
It like a drop of water getting slashed into existence into the air above the ocean. It fears the fall back into the ocean because it fears its very wateriness will end. LOL
But there is plenty of wateriness to go around obviously.


Hmmm...do we fear losing what we do not possess? Well, I guess we could fear losing what we only imagine we possess.

Thanks for posting your thoughts, Tarski. They're interesting.

KA
_barrelomonkeys
_Emeritus
Posts: 3004
Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2007 7:00 pm

Re: Wooly Speculations on Consciousness and Time (for Barrel

Post by _barrelomonkeys »

Tarski wrote:Well, I would be dishonest if I said that such speculations represent my view but.....let's let our imaginations go a bit:


I'm game.

In any case, if one were to take the view that there is such a fundamental aspect of reality, "basic consciousness", then one could speculate on its forms. In some Hindu thought, the consciousness associated with individual human (or animal) egos is a certain state of this basic consciousness somehow separated out into individualities like droplets separated from the ocean. The Higher Self is like the ocean; it is a Self that we all somehow share and originate from --sort of like all matter originates in some primal eruption from some vacuum state. This is very fuzzy and wooly thinking in my opinion but it has a certain intuitive appeal and enjoys a popularity with newagers and even some scientists.


There are a few things in Hindu thought that are appealing to me. But, I have very fuzzy thinking. The higher self actually makes quite a bit of sense to me (if I want to look for answers outside of brain evolution) as to how we interact with one another.

But, on the microscopic scale, we see no such preferred directionality. Past and future are on a more equal footing.


What do you mean by this? How is this so?

This "block universe picture has everything existing all at once so to speak. We might say that we don't stop existing when we die, it is just that our future selves are only in informational contact with the past part of our physical carreer--where now this whole carreer is the reality. This might be thought to create the illusion that something, our existence, is somehow escaping us.


I've reread this a number of times. I suppose my imagination is quite stunted because I can't grasp that there is any possibility of avoiding our eventual nonexistence. That it could possibly be an illusion and that it's all a block universe is so beyond my grasp.


So what is the take away lesson? Relax a bit about this death thing.


I'm glad you summed it up there for me. LOL

Thanks for elaborating.
_barrelomonkeys
_Emeritus
Posts: 3004
Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2007 7:00 pm

Post by _barrelomonkeys »

Tarski wrote:
liz3564 wrote:OK, Tarski....so for those of us who are NOT physics students....

You're saying that you believe there IS life after death....But none of us really can grasp what that type of life will be?

But we should take comfort in the fact that we will continue...in some form.


I am just speculating for fun. The idea is that the universe (or multiverse) continues and this includes something basic which, while not life as such, and not our individuality, is still something about our nature that we fear losing (consciousness).
It like a drop of water getting slashed into existence into the air above the ocean. It fears the fall back into the ocean because it fears its very wateriness will end. LOL
But there is plenty of wateriness to go around obviously.


There is actually something very, very compelling about this thought that we are droplets of water and fall back into the ocean... on a very primitve, intuitive level.
_Tarski
_Emeritus
Posts: 3059
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 7:57 pm

Re: Wooly Speculations on Consciousness and Time (for Barrel

Post by _Tarski »

barrelomonkeys wrote:
Tarski wrote:Well, I would be dishonest if I said that such speculations represent my view but.....let's let our imaginations go a bit:


I'm game.

But, on the microscopic scale, we see no such preferred directionality. Past and future are on a more equal footing.


What do you mean by this? How is this so?

.

We it is thought that everything is made of atomic and subatomic particles (quantum fields if you like).
The activities of these "basic parts" of nature are governed by equations which work just as well in reverse (replace time t by -t in a solution and it is still a solution. Take a movie of an atomic procees and then run the movie backwards. The result will be perfectly natural. It seems at first that this should extend up to macroscopic objects like books and people.
But then that means that a broken egg putting itself back together spontaneously is just as possible from that perspective as is a an egg breaking! But we don't see such things with big objects like eggs and people. Eggs don't reasemble and people don't grow back to children and return to the womb etc. I movie run backwards look like an impossible sequence of event--not so at the fundamental level as far as we know.
It is thought to be a puzzle only partially resolved assuming the universe was somehow highly odered at the time of the big bang.
_barrelomonkeys
_Emeritus
Posts: 3004
Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2007 7:00 pm

Re: Wooly Speculations on Consciousness and Time (for Barrel

Post by _barrelomonkeys »

Tarski wrote:
barrelomonkeys wrote:
Tarski wrote:Well, I would be dishonest if I said that such speculations represent my view but.....let's let our imaginations go a bit:


I'm game.

But, on the microscopic scale, we see no such preferred directionality. Past and future are on a more equal footing.


What do you mean by this? How is this so?

.

We it is thought that everything is made of atomic and subatomic particles (quantum fields if you like).
The activities of these "basic parts" of nature are governed by equations which work just as well in reverse (replace time t by -t in a solution and it is still a solution. Take a movie of an atomic procees and then run the movie backwards. The result will be perfectly natural. It seems at first that this should extend up to macroscopic objects like books and people.
But then that means that a broken egg putting itself back together spontaneously is just as possible from that perspective as is a an egg breaking! But we don't see such things with big objects like eggs and people. Eggs don't reasemble and people don't grow back to children and return to the womb etc. I movie run backwards look like an impossible sequence of event--not so at the fundamental level as far as we know.
It is thought to be a puzzle only partially resolved assuming the universe was somehow highly odered at the time of the big bang.



Oh, I get it.
_Ray A

Post by _Ray A »

Speculations on the nature of consciousness has not resolved much, and I doubt "empirical science" is likely to prove life after death, at least not for a while.

The conviction of life continuing after death largely comes from people who have had NDEs. For example:

“If the whole world was to rise up and say that there was no life after one left the physical organism, it would not make one particle of difference in my mind, as I am absolutely certain that I have been as free from my physical body as I ever will be, and that my life apart from it was far more wonderful than any life I have ever experienced in it."

So said a prominent New York physician and editor of his out-of-body experience more than 100 years ago.


“Previous to having passed through these things, I believed in continuity, but I had no abiding certainty concerning it. At the present time there is never a doubt as to its verity that troubles my mind. I have the absolute assurance that when the something we call death comes, it will only mean a new and larger and more complete life. I do not expect to convince any one of the truth as I see it merely by making those statements, because I have the feeling that one must realize these things


http://metgat.zaadz.com/blog

I really don't know how anyone can be certain death is final. They can believe it, but they can't know it. I know of no NDEer who has ever come back and said death is final. ALL have said the contrary. And millions of people have experienced this.
Post Reply