INFORMATION AS A FOUNDATION

It was not until Black Panther addressed me further down & later on that his true nature was revealed.

At that point, I posted a notice of such for Absolutely, which he apparently did not see prior to his newest post in this sub-thread.

Information in this forum most definitely travels at hypo-sonic speeds.

I might have restrained my impulse to insult. I do believe in reality as a place of "black and white" except for those who do not ask the right questions. They seem to wander in a gray, amorphous cloud whose nature is of no interest to me. Emotional trauma is difficult, but redefining your understanding of the nature of the entire universe does not address the real issue. I recommend analyzing the emotional experiences as such, not as (terribly statistically improbable) manifestations on the macroscopic level of effects demonstrated only on quanta. That is the closest I can come to a productive, repsectful response, so I am now leaving this post as politely as possible.

I am sorry for your loss and I wish you the best for the future.

by definition there is no larger entity (tho with a fractal universe, the overall universe could be divided into largely disjoint, essentially separate subsets, UsubA, UsubB, etc).

A physical computer simulates itself, it simply IS. there is no 'simulation' involved, as if you decided to getup and walk to the store, instead of doing it on your computer with 'the sims'.

There are no 'computers within computers'
tho there are computers within the physical universe. they will always be some subset (A) of total universe (U).

And since a computer could NOT be larger or equal to (U) computer will always be a subset of the universe.

There can be NO god in a universal sense as to be everywhere and everything, god would NOT be a subset of the universe (U) but would be equal to it. So there would be no universe left over to exist in its own self determination.

There can be powerful entities where if subset of humans = B and powerful entity = E then B << E or entity contains much greater subset of universe. In either case both B and E << U, i.e. are only a small fraction of the total universe.

Neither blind watchman or ID are correct.
The universe evolves as particles and energy interact. I don't think it is a coincidence that we are close to the open/closure factor for the universe. I believe the sum of the particle interactions over time had to barely top this for the universe to expand to where it is now.

Earth life evolved by becoming more efficient at collecting energy and arranging matter, so ONLY the most intricate designs flourished and succeeded, obviating need for 'Poof' creator to pop ready made things into place.
YOu can see the effect of this as earth life has drastically altered climate, and photosynthetic energy collecting surfaces of plants and diatoms are said to be over 100x the earth's surface area.

There may have been any # of previously mentioned 'godlike' entities, essentially aliens to us, unless their home area was this solar system, that could have guided said process, or outsite entities that re-arranged life's progress at critical points, but we have little or no evidence of that so is pointless to speculate, even tho possibility exists. DNA from interstellar clouds in space is also quite possible to have drifted to the surface in sufficient quantities to either start or alter primitive life.

All 'digital' things on earth have an 'analog' physical implementation, similar to the physical layer in the protocol stack. While atoms and particles have properties that trigger at certain energy levels, I think MrM wants 'digital' to mystimagically make everything seem like 'pure info' with no physical basis of which there is no such thing. ALL info resides in some physical basis. It may be transmitted (with a physical energy and/or matter basis during transmission) and replicated into new physical basis.

And while it is a physical universe with no imaginary 'back door' of God, there are some real back doors in effect, caused by the actual matter/energy distribution: neutrinos for example pass thru matter and there is a great excess of these, vast qtys pass thru all matter on earth. If you had a way of collecting them it would be in effect like a giant camera, similar to underground neutrino observatories we use now.

ALso, with MrM's fav theory of 'branes and strings, all matter/energy forms a vast matrix, which could be tapped to determine states of the universe at a different spot, subject to uncertainty principles, etc. These would be instruments like the cameras police now use to see thru walls.

MrM's claim of us being at a 'midway point' between particles and some larger features is meaningless. A. you didn't present any figures to support this, B. why the earth for this? does that mean anything? if the earth is at this midway point then the size of humans or an ant are NOT. Why not the solar system? Sound like this is a vague approximate unsupported 'fact', already debunked in EL.

Why 'largest galaxies' as the top point? They are not the largest structures in the universe. there are local groups of galaxies, superclusters of local groups, etc. There is a huge 'attractor' in virgo supercluster we are all being drawn gravitationally towards. Why not size of that as the 'top point' as largest observable strucure?

As for not believing something 'as we cannot see it directly', even our eyes are biological instruments. Facts do not 'pop directly into our brain'. Due to the structure of the 3d synthesis of the brain, and feedback loop thru the retina, we are able to 'see' things that don't exist (our dreams are examples of this process, feeding back imaginary visions thru our sight processing center).

Anyway, mrM I commend you for your interest in this all. I call this 'astrometaphysics'. If metaphysics is 'why are we here' then astrometaphysics is 'why is the universe here?'

Its taken me quite a while thinking about this to come to these conclusions. Your religous bent does not bother me. I think without that one would tend to view the universe as random, chaotic, disorganized, and with religion one seems to be disposed to think there IS some kind of hidden or non-hidden structure.

In fact the universe does have vast structures. I can't imagine it would have anything to do with a god from an insignificant planet on the outer rim of one small galaxy tho. But then if you tell me 'god is everywhere' this defeats the religious claim that earth is at the center of the religious universe.

Thanks for that offer - I will most likely take you up on that - I go on "holidays" in a week for 2 weeks so it will be most likely after that!

**So if I am not posting here - does not mean I have lost interest** :)

Going to the "Great Barrier Reef" :)

ps: I'll lookout for the "Elegant Universe"

For 1 start asking my Government why they discontinued their Deep Specs Observation Program and then send them all up in a rocket to meet the bloody thing first. With all the hot air that will be released that should deflect it so it misses.

2 After we have got rid of all th Pollies the Aliens then just might want to talk to us as the stupid people have disappeared.

3 While you may have saved a lot of $ on your car insurance do you get the same coverage? :D

Col ]:)

That goes under the name of FAI and in the trade it stands for F##k All Insurance but they are only too willing to take your money in handfuls and then they find every excuse under the sun not to pay out while still keeping the policy going. They learned that by canceling the policies they didn't get any return business so they just refuse to pay out on most claims and the send threating letters when their premium is due warning you about just how bad things will be for you without their support. :D

Col ]:)

Anyone who thought they could keep me away from a discussion like this needs to think again! My curiosity to know is just too much!

Your original post, "seeking to know the unknowable", is "right up my alley" as they say. Of course there are things out there for which there is no known explanation -- yet. Any astronomer will tell you that!

The more I get into quantum, the more I KNOW this is true. There is so much out there that needs a good explanation, yet can't be tested by any current scientific means.

Deepsand, I am particularly interested in "Flatland" as a movie; is it, by any chance, available on DVD (or even video would be nice). I remember how long it was before Stephen Hawking's A Brief History of Time got onto video, and I'd be very interested if I could pick up a copy of Flatland, knowing it's now on DVD or video.

Your experiments also interest me. There is so much we are still seeking to understand out there that's positively staring us in the face waiting for our answers. BP's recent experiences have clearly shown this to be the case.

Trouble is, I suppose if anyone began a thread on this topic, the nutters out there would gather like moths to a flame, so that no serious posts could really be made.

Just my musings, no more, deepsand! Thanks for your support anyway.

Captain Kirk would be very displeased with you!

And Spock himself would no doubt tell you it defied logic or something.

Many years ago when my late partner was still alive, he had an operation for cataracts. You may think that's a nice, straightforward piece of surgery these days, but not so.

My partner also suffered from glaucoma all his life, so they removed the iris completely. As a result, my partner not only regained his full eyesight but could also see well into the ultra-violet as well for some six months following the operation.

For an astronomer, this was simply magical; a bonus that could never have been requested in ordinary circumstances. Observing the stars in natural ultra-violet light was a revelation.

Unfortunately, this amazing ability faded with time, and after about six months, disappeared altogether.

G

Quantum science, in all its forms, is the future, Col. At least, it is if we're to ever get within cooee of a TOE, a goal posited by many physicists and others over the years.

Prepare to have your mind screwed big-time! Nothing else is possible.

G

Just dealing with the concept of Quantum Computers which are much closer to reality than a lot of people think.

The ideas behind these things are mind blowing and almost impossible to grasp the basic precepts but within 5 - 10 years they will be a common place thing and most likely no one will bother trying to understand how they work and just settle for the fact that they do work. Of course well need a whole new type of Operating System for these at first big beasts so they just might spell the end of M$ market dominance on the desktop and other places. But then again because of the number crunching power of these things most likely a lot of people will not need their power and just stick with their new X Box's and rent the programs that they need to use on line and only store the data on the HDD in the X Box.

But if you really want someone to screw with your brain all you need do is walk into any University and ask for the Computer Sciences Artificial Intelligence Section. That makes the Quantum look positively easy to understand. :D

Col ]:)

Not Scottie or Spock I clearly remember Mel Brooks allowing Mr Snotty to beam him into the next room and when he arrived his head was on backward. It was than that he realized that he had such a big a$$. So he was beamed back into the original room and arrived in the right condition and then took the 10 steps necessary to get to where he was wanted. :p

OH that was Spaceballs and not Star Trek I see now. :) Bur Kirk always asked Scottie to beam him up as Scottie was chief engineer and Mr Spock was the Science Officer so there is no logic in the Science officer being responsible for being in charge of the transporter. But again I suppose the same could be said for the Chief Engineer as well as surely he had more important things to be doing. :D

Incidentally I saw an interview with Patrick Stewart last week on the ABC one of the UK shows the "Kumar's at number 42" {Douglas Adams would be so proud or he would be saying Bloody Hell there is that 42 again!} But granny asked Patrick why there where no Indians on the Enterprise "Didn't they need IT support?" It just cracked me up and I don't think is saw much more of that show. :(

Col ]:)

Evolution Lie (EL), Panther, then best leave it alone! I think you've come to the right place here anyway. After all, what is information? How do you really define it? In short, information is anything and everything.

I've just come from watching a debate on telly -- well, more a panel discussion, I guess -- on the topic, Is grief the price we pay for love?

Well, of course it is; unfortunately, it was only a half-hour discussion, and could easily have gone on for much longer, but one or two of the points you've mentioned in other of your posts were indeed touched on in this discussion.

The problem we have with this kind of information, however, is that it's edging far closer to philosophy and metaphysics than it ever does to hard science.

Now philosophy and metaphysics simply can't be put under the microscope and tested in the normal way other scientific hypotheses are, and it's far more difficult to pin them down.

However, you can say exactly the same for quantum science (IMHO). A few years ago (last century; the 80s and 90s anyway), vast areas of quantum were perceived by mainstream science to be simply away in the realm of the fairies and those hardy scientists who propounded these weird quantum ideas to be weirdos themselves at the very least, and crackpots and totally screwed-up individuals at the worst.

And what happened? Suddenly, all this crackpot and weirdo stuff became mainstream science! How? It couldn't be tested in the normal way, there were no real experiments available, and yet, there it was, in the mainstream.

As we progress along the fantastic trail of quantum science, moving into more and more unreal territory all the time, as science and metaphysics and philosophy begin to merge more and more, I can see the day when the kinds of issues you have brought to this debate, Panther, become just as mainstream as all these other previously spurned issues.

There's still a helluva lot out there we don't know. We can't always pin it down and put it under the microscope or run experiments on it. I quite honestly believe the time will come -- and in the not too distant future too -- where we will be discussing things such as NDEs, ghosts and other "unmentionables" of the near past as mainstream science, because they will become part of our only route towards harnessing the power of the elusive TOE theory.

I may not be around to see it, but I think I'll be proved right in the end, as will you, Panther. As we delve more and more into the weirdness of quantum science, these issues will become more apparent to us.

Okay, guys and gals. I've said my say. Now you can all prepare to shoot me down in flames. Again, I'm ready!

G

Col, quite apart from the essential "42" associated with 'em, and I saw that show too. Poor ol' Patrick! I guess he gets a grilling about Captain Picard wherever he goes, no matter what else he's been in.

Yes, I remember that question too; Ummi's really a crack-up at any time, and she asks the best questions of all, I think.

I forgot about Scotty with the original ST. My mistake, and I stand corrected (or, as deepsand would have it, sit if I must!). But while Spock would be far too logical to blow his nose, I expect Scotty wouldn't, so he can be "Snotty" if you like!

But have to admit I haven't been following things there too closely of late. I guess I'll be more interested in 'em when they come close to being of the PC variety. Perhaps not everyone'll want to hire what they need for their X-boxes, but will really want the real thing in their homes after all.

I also have to admit I wouldn't have a clue as to how they're going to function -- quantum physics spins me out enough as it is, so quantum computers sounds like fantasyland at the moment!

Still, we all know that yesterday's science fiction is often today's hardcore science in many cases, so I guess it won't be long before these weird(?) machines are reality too.

Can you email me privately about this? I'm really very interested in quantum science, even if it does screw with my mind, and I'd love to know more about these future machines as well.

Like, what kind of operating system will they have to run, what sorts of software, hardware, etc. will be required? Will software and even hardware (as we presently know it) be required at all? How will we even work these machines?

My curiosity's escaped again! Sorry, Col! But I really am interested in all this.

G

I know that unexplainable things happen every day and accept this as normal after all who can explain why Windows does something on one computer and the exact opposite on another of the same configuration. :D

Think of trying to understand Windows as an entry level Quantum Physics course. :)

As for the Metaphysical stuff I'll just leave that to the people who claim to understand it granted Carl Jung started this all off or at least gave it the hint of respectability a very long time ago and we have seen it develop into what it is today which is totally mind bending and brain frying. :)

I'm still in problems with the basic concepts of why a computer works perfectly on one hard drive and fails to even put up a display when the drive is replaced with a new one. Everything works separately but when assembled the thing just will not work. Back in the days when I was doing Mechanical Design work we used to call this the "Jesus Factor" where all the individual parts would be perfect and when assembled the unit failed to work. Incidentally it wasn't called the Jesus Factor because the fitters used to swear when things like this happened or maybe it was but I wasn't around when the term was originally coined so I'm not exactly sure how it came about I just know we where told about it in Mechanical Engineering Class and it is accepted there and has been for a very long time. :(

Col ]:)

I don't deserve this honestly wanting to know about Quantum computers is a headache at the very least. They are considering using RAM with only a few atoms per layer and it's all related to String Theory.

As for OS's they'll still be required but they can or could conceivable be hard wired into the unit with software as well, what will exactly happen there is anyones guess at the moment but it is a safe bet to say that the first ones will sought of resemble the old Main Frames of yesteryear but with so much more processing power as to be almost unrecognizable.

I'll email you a starting point for these things privately when I find it again. :(

Col ]:)

It was Mel Brooks spoof of all the current Science Fiction things of the time. Snotty was the engineer in charge of the planet Spaceballs and then there was Dark Helmet {a very Darth Vaderish look} who played with his dolls. Lonestar the well sort of Harrison Ford like character who Jammed the radar on Spaceball 1 {the flag ship of the planet Spaceballs} they launched a giant jar of jam into the radar dish and Raspberry jam began to run down the monitor.

Their main objective was to steal all the air from planet Drudia where the princess ran away from her weeding in her new Mercedes space craft and Lonestar in a mobile home with wings rescued her. Of course Mel Brooks played Jodia or something similar and was a master of the "Schwartz." Lonestars side kick was a Mog part man & part dog called Barf.

Finally in the end when Lonestar defeated Dark Helmet the remains of Spaceball 1 fell onto a planet populated by apes and looked for all the world like a fairly well know Statue donated by the French to the US with just the head and left arm sticking out of the sand. Also Spaceball 1 was a transformer and changed from a space ship into "Mega Maid" with a giant vacuum cleaner to suck all the air out of the planets atmosphere.

It was sought of a spoof on ST, Star Wars, Transformers and Planet of the Apes and really quite funny particularly the bit when they lost the rescued Princess of Drudida to Lonestar so they rented the Video of the movie to find out where Lonestar was. It was the latest development in movies the VHS's where on the shelves before the movie was finished being shot.

Of course Mel Brooks also played the unstable and fairly stupid President of the Planet Spaceballs and in a unabashed attempt to gain revenue the master of the Schwartz was into merchandising where they had everything from a child's lunch box to The SpaceBalls Flame Thrower. Of course there was the mandatory Android who was the Princesses Chaperon it was built like a female and had a "Virgin Alarm" to prevent the Princess getting any.

A lot of people call me warped particularly with my weird sense of humor but I just point them to any Mel Brooks films and say I could be much worse. :D

Col ]:)

Without being able to view a clip of it, I cannot be certain, but only say that the film available at the following link may be the one that I saw.

[v]http://www.der.org/films/flatland.html[/v]

In searching for it, I did find 2 other links that may tickle your fancy.

[v]http://www.kcptech.com/dgylconf/proceedings/flatland/flat_triangle1.htm[/v]

[v]http://www.theory.caltech.edu/people/patricia/lctoc.html[/v]

Until a concept becomes empirically demonstrable, it remains merely philosophical or metaphysical.

That is why I have elsewhere noted, on more than one occasion, that the metaphysical, by definition, is neither amenable nor subject to proofs. If it were, it would no longer be metaphysical!

Consciousness

One aspect of consciousness is how we process information. Most people think that our memories are stored in the brain, much like a hard drive in a computer with 100% available recall. Many cannot understand that if a person claims to have consciousness apart from the body and the brain is flat lined, how can a person recall their NDE? This is a good point, but easily understood when one understands the nature of memories, the way we process information, and the way we recall that information.

There have been several recent studies on consciousness. One current theory is that consciousness is where the memories are stored, not in the brain as previously thought (Berkovich, 2001). Berkovich is in the forefront of scientists who is exploring the theory that as an information storage unit, the brain cannot possibly hold all the information that is required to function in our society. Consequently, scientist are considering the alternative that the brain is more of an accessing unit much like a radio receiver. The actual storage place is somewhere else, and NDEs would strongly suggest that place is the consciousness that survives the body.

Recent findings have shown that we typically store information as a core memory attached to an emotion and then file it in a concept area in the brain (Ornstein, 1991). When we retrieve our memories, we are programmed to "fill in the gaps." Therefore brain memories rarely are 100% totally accurate. Even Freud noticed that memories are stored by attaching emotion to them (p. 89). Emotions organize how we store and access information in the brain.

Recalled memory will be reconstructed using the brain preference for order and stability. The memory will have a certain order to it and will generally be re-told in a way that subjectively makes sense to the individual. Analogous to a computer hard drive, we retrieve the memory chunk of information, by accessing a particular emotional "directory" in a certain part of the brain. Then the memory chunk is connected to one or several information chunks and the brain makes up the most logical story to connect the separate information chunks. This means that the information is integrated into an existing subjective framework of reality.

That being said, the experiencers typically report life reviews that contain every thought, deed, and how we made others feel. Vivid NDE examples, also noted in the landmark NDE Dutch study by van Lommel, contain memories during physical death of events categorized as veridical perception (van Lommel, 2001, p. 2043). Experiencers were accurately reporting events they witnessed while in the out of body state during the time they coded. They couldn?t possibly know what the doctors, staff, or relatives were saying in the same or another room. Nonetheless, experiencers were privy to actual conversations and events. Dr. Ken Ring?s study showed that blind people can see during their NDE (Ring, 1999). There are reports from child experiencers that can recall NDEs like they happened yesterday. The youngest NDE reported to NDERF was at age 18 months old. The woman stated, "These experiences have stayed crystal clear and as fresh as when they occurred."

These reported events cannot be explained by conventional "brain" theories, such as brain chemistry, anoxia, random firings of a dying brain, false memories, or wishful thinking. The model that best fits the data would suggest that the stream of consciousness that leaves the body does act like a computer hard drive with 100% memory recall. This is unlike the way the brain processes routine information. When consciousness returns to the body, it takes years to have those intense memories of the NDE to funnel through to the brain and to be integrated with the current Earthly reality framework (van Lommel, p. 2043).

My hypothesis is that NDE is such an intense experience that it may create access to consciousness memories and therefore imprints in the brain in a manner similar to what is known as a "flashbulb moment" (Ornstein, p. 88). Flashbulb moments are times when the brain takes a picture of a particular instance; usually occurring in times of heightened sensory and emotional input or life-threatening moments. These memories are then ingrained in the brain and the person can recall the event like it happened yesterday. This type of memory is much different than the way we store and recall routine information. I would suggest that duality exists between brain and consciousness (mind) because both serve two very different but necessarily integrated functions.

The NDE is almost always reported in terms of a highly emotional experience. Perhaps via the mechanism of emotion, consciousness (and the memories contained therein) is more readily accessed by the brain. Most of the time, the NDE recollection is so far outside of mainstream reality experience, that it may well take years for a person to process the NDE memory and integrate it into their existing reality framework in a manner that it can be communicated to self and others.

With consciousness and the way we process information as the backdrop, we can look at the way experiencers process information, reintegrate it into their lives, and springboard the process into a spiritually transformative event. As mentioned above, experiencers typically will report their experience in terms of emotion and relationships. For many, this integration will change their focus from an Earthly, material world to that of spiritual and relationships. Therefore, this information processing may well be a major component of consciousness that survives the body. Further study is necessary to understand what types of information are retained and what part of the experience motivates the experiencers to change which behaviors on earth. Some of the new soulmate research will yield clues that answer some of these questions.

Consciousness

One aspect of consciousness is how we process information. Most people think that our memories are stored in the brain, much like a hard drive in a computer with 100% available recall. Many cannot understand that if a person claims to have consciousness apart from the body and the brain is flat lined, how can a person recall their NDE? This is a good point, but easily understood when one understands the nature of memories, the way we process information, and the way we recall that information.

There have been several recent studies on consciousness. One current theory is that consciousness is where the memories are stored, not in the brain as previously thought (Berkovich, 2001). Berkovich is in the forefront of scientists who is exploring the theory that as an information storage unit, the brain cannot possibly hold all the information that is required to function in our society. Consequently, scientist are considering the alternative that the brain is more of an accessing unit much like a radio receiver. The actual storage place is somewhere else, and NDEs would strongly suggest that place is the consciousness that survives the body.

Recent findings have shown that we typically store information as a core memory attached to an emotion and then file it in a concept area in the brain (Ornstein, 1991). When we retrieve our memories, we are programmed to "fill in the gaps." Therefore brain memories rarely are 100% totally accurate. Even Freud noticed that memories are stored by attaching emotion to them (p. 89). Emotions organize how we store and access information in the brain.

Recalled memory will be reconstructed using the brain preference for order and stability. The memory will have a certain order to it and will generally be re-told in a way that subjectively makes sense to the individual. Analogous to a computer hard drive, we retrieve the memory chunk of information, by accessing a particular emotional "directory" in a certain part of the brain. Then the memory chunk is connected to one or several information chunks and the brain makes up the most logical story to connect the separate information chunks. This means that the information is integrated into an existing subjective framework of reality.

That being said, the experiencers typically report life reviews that contain every thought, deed, and how we made others feel. Vivid NDE examples, also noted in the landmark NDE Dutch study by van Lommel, contain memories during physical death of events categorized as veridical perception (van Lommel, 2001, p. 2043). Experiencers were accurately reporting events they witnessed while in the out of body state during the time they coded. They couldn?t possibly know what the doctors, staff, or relatives were saying in the same or another room. Nonetheless, experiencers were privy to actual conversations and events. Dr. Ken Ring?s study showed that blind people can see during their NDE (Ring, 1999). There are reports from child experiencers that can recall NDEs like they happened yesterday. The youngest NDE reported to NDERF was at age 18 months old. The woman stated, "These experiences have stayed crystal clear and as fresh as when they occurred."

These reported events cannot be explained by conventional "brain" theories, such as brain chemistry, anoxia, random firings of a dying brain, false memories, or wishful thinking. The model that best fits the data would suggest that the stream of consciousness that leaves the body does act like a computer hard drive with 100% memory recall. This is unlike the way the brain processes routine information. When consciousness returns to the body, it takes years to have those intense memories of the NDE to funnel through to the brain and to be integrated with the current Earthly reality framework (van Lommel, p. 2043).

My hypothesis is that NDE is such an intense experience that it may create access to consciousness memories and therefore imprints in the brain in a manner similar to what is known as a "flashbulb moment" (Ornstein, p. 88). Flashbulb moments are times when the brain takes a picture of a particular instance; usually occurring in times of heightened sensory and emotional input or life-threatening moments. These memories are then ingrained in the brain and the person can recall the event like it happened yesterday. This type of memory is much different than the way we store and recall routine information. I would suggest that duality exists between brain and consciousness (mind) because both serve two very different but necessarily integrated functions.

The NDE is almost always reported in terms of a highly emotional experience. Perhaps via the mechanism of emotion, consciousness (and the memories contained therein) is more readily accessed by the brain. Most of the time, the NDE recollection is so far outside of mainstream reality experience, that it may well take years for a person to process the NDE memory and integrate it into their existing reality framework in a manner that it can be communicated to self and others.

With consciousness and the way we process information as the backdrop, we can look at the way experiencers process information, reintegrate it into their lives, and springboard the process into a spiritually transformative event. As mentioned above, experiencers typically will report their experience in terms of emotion and relationships. For many, this integration will change their focus from an Earthly, material world to that of spiritual and relationships. Therefore, this information processing may well be a major component of consciousness that survives the body. Further study is necessary to understand what types of information are retained and what part of the experience motivates the experiencers to change which behaviors on earth. Some of the new soulmate research will yield clues that answer some of these questions.

Can memory be stored outside the brain?

Modern scientific thought is increasingly exploring the notion that memories can exist independent of brain function, explaining why, for example, comatose patients who recover are able to process memories of their experiences.

Is reincarnation the act of "tapping in" to a universal memory bank?

An incredible collection of scientifically examined cases in several countries - such as so-called birthmark studies: in which people who claim to be reincarnated have birthmarks that correspond to wounds of those from whom they were reincarnated - suggest this is so.

Until I remembered you're an Aussie, so likely to be around at the same times I am, Panther!

Yes, while I agree with you that there certainly is a mountain of CIRCUMSTANTIAL evidence for NDEs, it's just that -- it IS only circumstantial.

And how the hell are you going to put that kind of thing under the microscope or test it in any scientific manner acceptable to the scientific community at large? You can't. You're not. Simple as that.

And while I'm prepared to admit to a little personal experimentation myself shortly after my father's death (I'll expand on that when you email me personally, Panther), I'm not sure that I can take that final step yet and confidently say that I am "holding that rainbow in my hand".

I shall await hearing from you personally, after your holiday.

G

Since both of you live in fair Brissy, there's got to be some way around this!

However, I'll not influence this one way or the other, and I'll certainly not break Col's identity in any way.

Still, two guys in IT, both living within cooee of one another! Crikey, you can't get much closer than that!

The white mice may be a way! Do panther's eat 'em??

G

Although I have to admit it's so long ago now that it can well do with another reading, I think. And the sequel too!

And I'm sure Col has read it! Well, I guess I can say this much about him, since he's said it himself here at TR, probably somewhere in the middle of The Authenticity of the Christian Scriptures thread if my memory serves me.

Col is a Buddhist monk, probably a Shaolin monk, from hints he's let drop from time to time. He was one of HH the Dalai Lama's bodyguard when HH was in Australia (and Melbourne) many years ago now.

Okay, that's all I'm prepared to say, but you can understand why I suggested Col now, Panther!
Good luck!

G

To take a look at Col's profile, Panther. He's open to receiving private emails. Why don't you try that?

Now I really had better go and check my own emails!

Cheers

G

I'm going to have a ball with all this!

Thanks, Boone!

G

But I've got an old copy of it on video. That is, it belongs to Mart, as do several other Mel Brooks films. I particularly remember as well his History of the World, Part 1 (which is Mart's too), and was Wholly Moses MB's or not?

No matter, I not only thoroughly enjoy Mel Brook's sense of humour -- probably because it's a Jewish sense of humour, like mine -- but I am also, as is Mart, totally and completely warped where sense of humour is concerned.

Must be from growing up with a Jewish father and being married to a Jew for twenty-five years ... or something!

Cheers

G

I just thought a little bit more fried brain wouldn't do you any harm!

I'll go and have a look at my emails; I haven't opened 'em today!

G

See this email I just sent you, that you're reading
right now? This email is proof of the existence of God.

Yeah, I know, that sounds crazy. But in this email,
I'm going to explain why.

This email you're reading contains letters, words and
sentences. It contains a message that means something.
As long as you can read English, you can understand what
I'm saying.

You can do all kinds of things with this email. You
can read it on your computer screen. You can print it out on
your printer. You can read it out loud to a friend who's in
the same room as you are. You can call your friend and read it
to her over the telephone. You can save it as a Microsoft
WORD document. You can forward it to someone via email, or you
can post it on a website.

Regardless of how you copy it or where you send it,
the information is the same. My email contains a message.
It contains information in the form of language. The message
is independent of the medium it is sent in.

Messages are not matter, even though they can be carried
by matter (like printing this email on a piece of paper).

Messages are not energy even though they can be carried
by energy (like the sound of my voice.)

Messages are immaterial. Information is itself a very
unique kind of entity. It can be stored and transmitted and
copied in many forms, but the meaning still stays the same.

Messages can be in English, French or Chinese.
Or Morse Code. Or mating calls of birds. Or the Internet.
Or radio or television. Or computer programs or architect
blueprints or stone carvings. Every cell in your body
contains a message encoded in DNA, representing a complete
plan for you.

OK, so what does this have to do with God?

It's very simple. Messages, languages, and coded
information can ONLY come from a mind. A mind that
agrees on an alphabet and a meaning of words and
sentences. A mind that expresses both desire and
intent.

Whether I use the simplest possible explanation,
such as the one I'm giving you here, or if we analyze
language with advanced mathematics and engineering
communication theory, I can say this with total
confidence:

"Messages, languages and coded information never,
ever ever come from anything else besides a mind.
No one has ever produced a single example of a message
that did not come from a mind."

Nature can create fascinating patterns - snowflakes,
sand dunes, crystals, stalagmites and stalagtites. Tornados
and turbulence and cloud formations.

But non-living things cannot create language. They
cannot create codes. Rocks cannot think and they
cannot talk. And they cannot create information.

It is believed by some that life on planet earth arose
naturally from the "primordial soup," the early ocean which
produced enzymes and eventually DNA and primitive cells.

But there is a problem with this theory: It fails to
answer the question, 'Where did the information come from?'

DNA is not merely a molecule. Nor is it simply a "pattern."
Yes, it contains chemicals and proteins, but those chemicals
are arranged to form a language, in the exact same way that
English and HTML and JavaScript are languages.

DNA has a four-letter alphabet, and structures very similar
to words, sentences and paragraphs. With very precise
instructions.

To the person who says that life arose naturally,
you need only ask: "Where did the information come from?
Show me just one example of a language that didn't come
from a mind."

As simple as this question is, I've presented it to
many people who say that life arose without the assistance of
God. But to a person, none of them have ever been able to
provide an answer. This is a riddle so simple any child
can understand, yet so complex, no atheist can solve.

Matter and energy have to come from somewhere. Everyone
can agree on that. But information has to come from somewhere,
too! Information is an entity fully on par with matter and
energy. And information can only come from a mind. If books
and poems and TV shows come from human intelligence, then all
living things inevitably came from a superintelligence.

Every word you hear, every sentence you speak, every
dog that barks, every song you sing, every email you read,
every packet of information that zings across the Internet,
is proof of the existence of God. Because information
and language always originate in a mind.

In the beginning were words and language.

In the Beginning was Information.

When we consider the mystery of life - where it came
from and how it was possible - do we not at the same time
ask the question where it is going, and what its purpose is?

I've been very busy today so much for the idea of Public Holidays every one of the domestic clients seems to get messed up at these times so I don't get a chance to even play. :(

Now I've tried very hard to keep the Bible Bashing Belt in the US off my back and any talk of reincarnation here would rouse some people who are so one sided that they leave a bit to be desired. I can still remember some one claiming that the Dali Lama was nothing more than a "Deluded Pagan" but since you are in Brissy you could always ring me after all I'm based at Carandale sort of anyway as I'm only .5 of a K away down the main road from the shopping center. Drop me an e-mail through the peer listings and we'll have a chat for a few minutes/days/months/years. :D As I can not e-mail you with my phone number you'll have to drop me an e-mail so we can get in contact. And if you really like I can pull out a Vic 20 for you to play with there should be one around here somewhere. ;) personally I preferred the Mainframes that where around at the time and not those horrible acoustic modems that you had to put the handset into for a modem connection. I think I've even got an Expansion Pack for the Vic lying around somewhere as well. I could probably find the thing in a 5 year period. :p But I can lay my hands on the books very quickly as I can sort of see them from where I'm currently sitting. :D

But put very basically any of the reincarnations beliefs work on the idea that we keep coming back until we eventually get it right and that doesn't require a nice neat continuous line in time to achieve either so for instance you could live this life in the current time frame and your next life could be in 5,000 BC or even 600,000 AD on our time scales. As I don't want a bunch of fundamentalist Christians bashing down my front door in an effort to convert/pervert me to their way of thinking I'll leave it there. :D

Col ]:)

All of the nicest days this year have been Fridays! This is so aggravating that I've just picked up on this thread to do some buttock prodding to calm my nerves. Note: not a single post on EL for a couple of weeks, now! Tell, you - it's worse than giving up smoking.

This was Mrmiami's thread so I though that everyone was fair game and vitriol became a way of life... :(

Panther seems to be alternately nice and then aggravates the wiz out of me by posting some metaphysical guff that he's already done ten posts back. As it's not science, I don't work up the same head of steam as I did with ippirate.

If it gets sunny enough to go boating and fishing I may chill out enough to post only sweetness and light.

But don't hold your breath.

Neil :D

You can be bitter. It's allowed. I am bitter master.

Yeah, the hurricane insurance thing down here is ridiculous. A guy with a $5M home on the water pays only about 70% more than a guy with a $500k home inland. It makes no sense.

I'm all for the concept of making homeowner's policies exclusively value based. I don't like the fact that my premiums are paying to replace $3M homes on the beachfront when I couldn't even get my house re-roofed for $4,500 by them.

So I screwed up and can't count! Big deal! Don't forget, my "PhD's" in Insanity -- pretty horrible disaster.

Col, if the article's in New Scientist, I may be able to track it down on the web. I'll give it a go, anyway. Save you the time, since you don't have any anyway!

Thanks for the info -- myself and the white mice!

A Seminal Presentation by Astrophysicist Dr. Hugh Ross, given in South Barrington, Illinois, April 16, 1994

Editor's note: This lecture was selected not in spite of being more than 10 years old, but because it is more than 10 years old. Virtually every statement and inference given in this speech has been reinforced and further validated during the last decade by measurements from the COBE Satellite, the Hubble Telescope, and advances in physics and astronomy.

The hallmark of a truly reliable scientific theory is that it is thoroughly testable, scientifically falsifiable, and makes accurate predictions. Dr. Ross's origins model has stood the test of time for nearly two decades, literally receiving further validation on a monthly basis as physics and astronomy journals publish new papers. I believe you'll enjoy this ground-breaking information from Hugh Ross.

Listen to Audio for "full version" or read for abridged version.

http://www.cosmicfingerprints.com/audio/newevidence.htm

But actually I think ProtusX who has been responsible for one of the biggest threads here at TR is still in Iraq so I don't think there will be any problems from there as Iraq is on the list of countries where Windows can not be exported so the US military can have no MS computers. :D

They must all be using a European version of Linux where the trade restrictions are no where near as tough. :p

So ProtusX will not be around for a while anyway and Mr Miriam seems to have given up on this thread for the time being at least anyway.

So I think we'll be safe for the short term anyway. :D

Col ]:)

"TECH'S KNOW IT ALL"
[v]https://www.techrepublic.com.com/5208-6230-0.html?forumID=8&threadID=165719&start=0[/v].

Even then he was a shouter.

One does not need to be dying to have such experiences.

In fact, there is much anecdotal evidence to suggest that the state of mind experienced by those in great fear for their lives is very much like, and may in fact be the same, as that experienced by those who are actually physiologically "dying."

The fact that HDEs are "real" in no way proves that they are an "out of body" experience.

Whether they are or are not remains to be proven.

I've a recollection of a nice intro. to such, but the source escapes me at the moment.

I & when I find something suitable, I'll pass it your way.

The re-visitation of Flatland revived a question that I forgot I was pondering; i.e., as we can perceive & measure in 3 dimensions, is that not [i]prima faciae[/i] evidence that we exist in at least [b]four[/b] physical dimensions?

There are 2 major factions, split over the issue of re-incarnation.

Here in the US, the General Assembly of Spirtualists represents those who believe in such; the National Spiritualist Association of Churchs ([v]http://www.nsac.org/[/v], those that hold that one is physically carnate but once.

And I totally agree with you, Boone. But mystical or magical still doesn't necessarily imply instant empiricism just because they may one day be provable.

Okay, I admit to a little gentle facetiousness by talking about God the way I did, although it doesn't alter the fact that I have no faith in any religion that supports such a God. I don't.

I'd rather put my "faith" in the common morals and ethics of our society and live by them than some amorphous anthropomorphic figment of our imaginations, that's all.

Maybe that post would have done better in Dawg's thread than here, but no matter.

However, there are still concepts that will forever remain "magic" or "mystical", if you like, no matter how much we know about them, can even prove their existence and, to some extent, even test them via the scientific method.

These concepts fall into two camps, the wholly astronomical, and the cosmological/quantum. The astronomical includes things like the Big Bang (I prefer the Big Whimper, but that's another story!), plus dark matter, MACHOS, WIMPS, and a host of other bizarre objects that, because of distance, both temporal and spatial, will remain forever out of our physical reach.

On the cosmological/quantum side, there are those many hypotheses that no matter how popular they become [in the quest for the ultimate TOE] or how "testable" they may be as well, will forever remain just as beyond our physical reach for as long as we remain in our present three-dimensional moulds. They will forever be just mathematical constructs.

But just as much does this kind of "magic" edge towards the philosophical plane as the kind that produces Creator Gods (IMHO). Both are unreachable by current technology, and no matter what our progress in the future, may forever remain that way.

Perhaps there's a way to further define these images -- "quantum magic", "philosophical magic" and "cosmological magic" maybe.

Okay, I'm ready to be proved wrong, and just as ready to be shot down in flames. I have great difficulty trying to put into words some of these concepts because we haven't invented the words for them yet!

Whenever you come by it again, Boone.

Yes, I've heard about this four spatial dimensions thing and am still pondering it! I read it recently in Michio Kaku's Travelling in Ten Dimensions (I think that's the title) and I'm still having trouble with it.

How can the fourth dimension be spatial and temporal at the same time? Unless we're talking along the same lines as blasted Heisenberg, or something like the two slit experiment????

My brain just fried. Better go and veg for awhile.

A helluva lot better than I ever could! Yes, I totally agree with you, Boone, EXCEPT for one thing.

String theory, part of quantum physics, and its associated 11 dimensional universe, etc., can never be tested in the scientific manner.

Maybe they "became empirical" because of their ability to both describe and predict physical phenomena, as you've said.

But no matter how hard we try, as long as we remain three-dimensional critters, such a task continues to be impossible.

And I asked Col about quantum computing/ers, and he nearly tore his hair out. I think he thought I was being nasty or something!

I can't ever see multi-universes, or parallel universes, ever reaching empirical status either, somehow, no matter how "physical" they may be to us in the future.

Doesn't stop me believing that they exist though!

I think I'd place NDEs on a par with dreams. Both are "experiences". We know we dream, and this has been verified by countless tests in sleep laboratories across the globe.

We even know why we dream. What we don't know -- yet -- is how we dream.

I would take a punt that NDEs [and nightmares, and lucid dreaming, also called "OOBEs"] are all extensions of dreaming to some degree.

And while we can accurately measure when we dream, and know why we do it, we have still to figure out "how" we do these things.

That it's all part of what goes on in the brain is already a given, but let's face it, we only use between 10% and 15% of our brains in our entire lives!

What of the other 85% or 90%? What does that do in the same time? It's like knowing we can only see 2% of the [baryonic] universe right now; the other 98% remains invisible.

The brain is an awfully complex organ. We're really only on the very edge of finding out how it ticks. And that probably goes for NDEs as well.

Conventional wisdom tells us that the fourth dimension represents time.

Consider what would happen if a person shaped as a three-dimensional sphere wanted to become visible to the two-dimensional being. The three-dimensional sphere would necessarily be invisible until she placed herself into the exact plane where the two-dimensional can see her. It goes without saying that, from our third-dimensional viewpoint, we would consider it closed-minded for the two-dimensional being to say that we or the sphere-being do not exist because we are invisible to the two dimensional being.

Another concept is that the two-dimensional being would not have scientific proof unless one from the three-dimension directly intersects with the two-dimensional field of vision. This would be an arbitrary process unless the third-dimensional being was willing to cooperate in being studied or the two-dimensional being had reliable mastery over transcending the limitations of the two-dimensional world.

It would be far easier for a two- dimensional being to talk about other two-dimensional planes and relate that experience to other two-dimensional beings, than it would be to enter and explain the third-dimensional reality to two-dimensional beings.

Because of the lack of understanding of the two-dimensional world, the line person would consider the experience mystical and attribute it to religious figures. From there, the line person could:

(1) Shut the experience out and pretend it didn?t happen,

(2) Privately continue to learn from the plane person, or

(3) Try to communicate the experience to other line persons and risk ridicule and/or suppression of the newly discovered reality.

Only by thinking outside of the three-dimensional box will be able to advance in consciousness and to understand our true nature.

Crucial to our understanding of the fourth dimension would be an open mind to the communication we receive from the fourth dimension. As with our communication with a two dimensional being, it would be necessary for us to distinguish between social constraints and concepts as presented from the fourth dimension. This means that religious dogma, and scientific obstinacy would need to be temporarily suspended for true understanding to occur.

We become aware of the fourth (or greater) dimensions, first by what we can mathematically abstract: secondly, by anomalies we observe on earth when those of other dimensions choose to intersect with our particular three dimensional earth reality: and thirdly by the observation and personal experiences of others who talk of the particular ability of the soul to transcend across the various dimensions.

The mathematical extrapolations have been done and there are many good articles on the internet and some even have pictures. We know that the fourth dimension exists in theory, just as the two dimensional person could theorize about the lines of a circle.

There is a wide range of human experiences that fit into the category of spiritually transformative events. Many attribute this to genuine religious experiences, while many others discount the experiences as work of the devil or a medically sick mind. Given the way that a one or two dimensional being would react to us, it is understandable how three dimensional beings would view an interaction from a fourth (or greater) dimensional being. Furthermore, we would hear a fourth dimensional being in our mind and would not necessarily be aware of their existence unless that being chose to interact with us. Interaction could only occur by intersecting our world in our waking or a state of altered consciousness. That does not mean that failure to intersect with us means the fourth dimensional being does not exist. It also may be part of the reason why many clinical studies fail. There could be a component co-creation that is necessary with the other side?s cooperation in order for us to be able to understand the fourth dimension.

We also need the wisdom and humility to understand that no single person will have the answer, be it a scientist or a spiritualist.

Good....

Carl Jung said dreams are "the main source of all of our knowledge about symbolism."

This means that the messages you receive from your dreams are expressed symbolically and must be interpreted to find their true meanings.

Each night the average person spends approximately ninety minutes in a dream state. Some of us can remember all or most of our dreams, and others have trouble remembering even a snippet from one of our nightly sojourns.

A dream may be of a physical, mental, or spiritual nature and may deal with all manner of psychic manifestations.

Dreams are 'maybe' journeys into the spirit world.

To begin exploring astral projection, pay attention to your dreams each night. Eventually, you will come to the realization that you were in the astral realm, but did not realize it.

As you are into Astrology you may get a kick out of the latest {for me anyway} New Scientist that I've just got around to part way reading.

God it is new I must have not filed a few it is however the Cover Story on the 4 June 2005 issue about negative refraction of light and why the current Star Maps may not be correct as well as explain just why the observations on the Pioneer 10 Spacecraft seem not to compute. They also go on to discuss not only Dark Matter but the possibility of Dark Energy.

So before you begin drawing up "She Who Must Be Obeyed' Star Chart you might want to delve into these possible problems and correct it accordingly. Of course if Negative Refraction does occur that will leave the Astronomers and Astrophysicists scratching their heads foe quite some time to come but it just may very well explain where all the missing matter actually is. :D

Col ]:)

Is claimed to be the 14 th reincarnation of the original person who claimed they would keep returning to rule their country until all of the followers reached Spiritual Enlightenment.

This particular person is capable of remembering where things from his immediate previous life and they have been proved correct particularly when he identifies where some of the objects that where part of his daily life in the previous incarnation can be not only described but actually found.

Col ]:)