Consciousness

Recommended Posts

33 minutes ago, iNow said:

I’d have to respect you in order for you to make me upset.

Hey they are just my opinions.That is why I posted them on the philosophy forum.

Science has run out of ideas in my opinion.

When presently accepted science can definitively explain to me why the 4 magnetic force interactions of NN….NS….SN…..SS are not the same, then I will take it seriously.

It amazes me that something as simple as science not being able to answer this fundamental question puts into question presently accepted scientific theories.

So what presently accepted science is claiming then is that push is the same as pull and pull is the same as push.They are identical.

Ummm..sorry I don’t  agree with that.

• Replies 121
• Created

Posted Images

2 hours ago, Jasper10 said:

Science has run out of ideas in my opinion.

3 hours ago, Jasper10 said:

It is my opinion that the electromagnetic fields that saturate the universe at both the macro and micro levels are created by the spin of stars/planets/subatomic particles in those electromagnetic fields,the spin  creating the electrical signals that create the electromagnetic fields thus producing the 4 magnetic force interactions (2 attractions/2 repulsion’s) that are required for push/pull balance.

Rather than indulging in a non productive slanging match about mostly off topic material I suggest you go away and study

Alfven and Lerner.

Alfven got the 1970 Nobel Prize for his work on such theories.

Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, studiot said:

Rather than indulging in a non productive slanging match about mostly off topic material I suggest you go away and study

Alfven and Lerner.

Alfven got the 1970 Nobel Prize for his work on such theories.

I will look that up.Thanks.

Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Jasper10 said:

Hey they are just my opinions.That is why I posted them on the philosophy forum.

Science has run out of ideas in my opinion.

When presently accepted science can definitively explain to me why the 4 magnetic force interactions of NN….NS….SN…..SS are not the same, then I will take it seriously.It

!

Moderator Note

You were told not to bring this up again. You had your shot, and you blew it.

Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, swansont said:
!

Moderator Note

You were told not to bring this up again. You had your shot, and you blew it.

Sorry bring what up again?

Share on other sites

On 6/21/2022 at 11:20 PM, Jasper10 said:

Hey they are just my opinions.That is why I posted them on the philosophy forum.

Science has run out of ideas in my opinion.

When presently accepted science can definitively explain to me why the 4 magnetic force interactions of NN….NS….SN…..SS are not the same, then I will take it seriously.

It amazes me that something as simple as science not being able to answer this fundamental question puts into question presently accepted scientific theories.

So what presently accepted science is claiming then is that push is the same as pull and pull is the same as push.They are identical.

Ummm..sorry I don’t  agree with that.

1$\mathrm{Philosophy}=Love Of Wisdom$

2$\mathrm{Chemistry}\Leftrightarrow \mathrm{Mathematics}$

3$\mathrm{Physics}\leftrightarrow \mathrm{Astronomy}\leftrightarrow \mathrm{Music}\leftrightarrow \mathrm{Biology}$

4$\mathrm{Consilience}$

Share on other sites

10 hours ago, NTuft said:
!

Moderator Note

We expect responses to be based in mainstream material, not something you’ve made up, and we also expect it to be relevant to the discussion.

Share on other sites

Can I ask a question ….why does science persist in pursuing a science based upon a guessed half philosophy that it has no way of proving one way or the other?

All sciences are interconnected.

Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Jasper10 said:

Can I ask a question ….why does science persist in pursuing a science based upon a guessed half philosophy that it has no way of proving one way or the other?

All sciences are interconnected.

Proof is for maths. The best can science can do is supporting evidence with varying degrees of mathematically-derived probability; confidence interval.

Quote

What does a confidence interval tell you? The confidence interval tells you more than just the possible range around the estimate. It also tells you about how stable the estimate is. A stable estimate is one that would be close to the same value if the survey were repeated.

Edited by StringJunky
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Jasper10 said:

Can I ask a question ….

No, not unless it’s on-topic and furthers discussion of said topic. As this is a thread on consciousness, your question has no place here. This question specifically:

2 hours ago, Jasper10 said:

why does science persist in pursuing a science based upon a guessed half philosophy that it has no way of proving one way or the other?

Share on other sites

6 hours ago, iNow said:

No, not unless it’s on-topic and furthers discussion of said topic. As this is a thread on consciousness, your question has no place here. This question specifically:

But it is on topic because in my opinion all sciences are interconnected and philosophy does have a direct connection to scientific theories/equations.

From my experience and from a consciousness point of view there is an “in synch” and “out of synch consciousness” state known in psychology as manual and autopilot.These consciousness states definitely “toggle”.

It is my opinion that these consciousness states are related to sine waves either being “in synch” or “out of synch”.These sine waves being related to magnetic field and electrical sine wave interaction happenings  within the brain.

As there is a “toggling” of these consciousness states the individual does know through experience that there is a difference between these consciousness sates.

Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Jasper10 said:

From my experience and from a consciousness point of view there is an “in synch” and “out of synch consciousness” state known in psychology as manual and autopilot.These consciousness states definitely “toggle”.

!

Moderator Note

"Your experience" doesn't really matter; it needs to be mainstream science if you're going to cite it in support of anything. Also, you posted this in philosophy, so you are expected to discuss philosophy.

If you have a model of consciousness that you are willing to defend, post it in speculations.

Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Jasper10 said:

But it is on topic because in my opinion all sciences are interconnected and philosophy does have a direct connection to scientific theories/equations.

From my experience and from a consciousness point of view there is an “in synch” and “out of synch consciousness” state known in psychology as manual and autopilot.These consciousness states definitely “toggle”.

It is my opinion that these consciousness states are related to sine waves either being “in synch” or “out of synch”.These sine waves being related to magnetic field and electrical sine wave interaction happenings  within the brain.

As there is a “toggling” of these consciousness states the individual does know through experience that there is a difference between these consciousness sates.

But what does your conscience say?

Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

But what does your conscience say?

I believe we need to take up these discussions in speculations.I’m not sure what you mean by ….what does your conscience say?

I know from experience that there is a toggling of consciousness states from manual to autopilot.As far as putting this into an equation, I can only speculate that it is related to 2 sine waves within the brain being in either a duality or unity or in synch or out of synch state.I speculate that these sine waves are related to electrical and magnetic sine wave interactions.

So not only do both sine waves individually toggle between +/-, each sine wave toggles with the other sine wave as in they are either “in synch” or “out of synch”….i.e.in  a duality or unity state.

I will start another consciousness post in speculations.

My view is science is at a crossroads.

We already have spectator science.We now also need to consider player science as well if we are to understand consciousness better.

Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jasper10 said:

My view is science is at a crossroads.

This is part of what you don't understand about science. Public understanding of science is at a crossroads, but science itself doesn't travel on roads at all, nor does it come to choices in direction that might be called crossroads. Science follows the preponderance of evidence to arrive at the best supported explanations for various phenomena. It models that behavior and uses success to predict other outcomes. The choice of models depends on the area of application. Your approach guarantees you'll never understand that because you think it's about discerning a single path rather than monitoring how nature behaves.

If you do start a Speculations thread about your idea, focus on how you can express your idea without using terms you've made up, and present as much evidence as you can to support what you're saying. Things you say you "know from experience" are anecdotal and subjective, and we're looking for as much objectivity as possible.

Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Jasper10 said:

But it is on topic because in my opinion all sciences are interconnected and philosophy does have a direct connection to scientific theories/equations.

I have started another discussion thread for your benefit to discuss this idea.

Share on other sites

Why waste your time with a science that doesn’t involve consciousness and yet if you don’t understand consciousness how can you avoid wasting your time?

Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, Jasper10 said:

Why waste your time with a science that doesn’t involve consciousness and yet if you don’t understand consciousness how can you avoid wasting your time?

Do you need to know how a computer works at the hardware/software interface in order to use it? Why do we need to understand consciousness in order to do science?

Edited by StringJunky
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, StringJunky said:

Do you need to know how a computer works at the hardware/software interface in order to use it? Why do we need to understand consciousness in order to do science?

Because the 2 consciousness states  are directly related to binary code in experiential form.

All sciences are interconnected.

Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Jasper10 said:

the 2 consciousness states  are directly related to binary code in experiential form.

Share on other sites

10 hours ago, StringJunky said:

Do you need to know how a computer works at the hardware/software interface in order to use it? Why do we need to understand consciousness in order to do science?

You certainly need to know how a computer works to improve on it.

Like all life all science is individual.  Individuals invent hypothesis and experiment and interpret results.  Individuals build models and then science changes one funeral at a time.

Without understanding consciousness the mechanisms of this interpretation are unknown.  The effects of interpretations on humans and other science are unknown.

Only individuals are conscious.

Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Jasper10 said:

Because the 2 consciousness states  are directly related to binary code in experiential form.

All sciences are interconnected.

!

Moderator Note

Support this in a Speculations thread.