Earlier quoted context omitted.
Seems like your mother bought 12 books too many
Which ones?
Well, the 12 ones after the first one, since they're all one "replace all" away from each other!
Is the Sun Conscious? (2021) [pdf]
271–280 of 377 posts
Re: Is the Sun Conscious? (2021) [pdf]
#272I'm an extremely strong believer that the sun has consciousness. I think there exists quantum processes that causes consciousness and that suns, gravitons, etc. all have it. I likely won't be alive to ever find out, but if someone does discover it, I hope a historian finds this thread :)
What is consciousness to you?
Re: Is the Sun Conscious? (2021) [pdf]
#273It would be very odd for large mammals to be the only things in universe exhibiting self awareness. Usually when something exists in nature, it's everywhere - gravity, radiation, nuclear forces. Self awareness is probably just another one of these things. Rock is self aware of being a rock, sun is self aware of being a star, human is self aware of being a human, humanity as a whole is self aware of being humanity. No…
[deleted]
Re: Is the Sun Conscious? (2021) [pdf]
#274Earlier quoted context omitted.
> if it actually exists It seems likely that it exists, because why would we discuss it? (Occam's razor) Also consciousness has an effect on physics for the same reason.
> Also consciousness has an effect on physics for the same reason. I don't think that is correct. If physicists are alleging that physics works differently when we literally turn our back then that is something they should spend more time publicising. What I assume you are referring to is that, in practice, to observe something experimentally we have to interact with it (eg, to record the velocity of an object a lase…
> If physicists are alleging that physics works differently when we literally turn our back then that is something they should spend more time publicising.
What I'm referring to is that talking is a physical activity. And since we talk about consciousness, physics must be influenced by consciousness.
(An explanation could be that physics is an emergent property of consciousness. Note that people often assume that the converse is true, but I think that is wrong for the aforementioned reasons.)
Re: Is the Sun Conscious? (2021) [pdf]
#275When you pray to the sun god it won't hear for 8 minutes, and then you need to wait for another 8 minutes for the response. Just basic physics. If it's an emergency the sun can't help you, better luck praying to the moon.
Given current understanding of physics, which has evolved over time. My favorite idea is that to travel faster than light one could, theoretically, bring the other side closer and then "step over". Food for thought.
Re: Is the Sun Conscious? (2021) [pdf]
#276What we get from the sun is low entropy, since all the energy that gets to Earth has to be irradiated away, else we'd cook quickly. If this low entropy carried by energy flows makes life possible, and life is how I get my consciousness. I'd say in a way my consciousness comes from the sun. The warmth of my skin and the qualia of my thoughts are movement perpetrated on Earth by the sun.
> I'd say in a way my consciousness comes from the sun. Our star is the major, "central" (chuckle) factor in our Goldilocks existence, but Anthropomorphism is an anthropocentric game. [1] Cyanobacteria [2] , flowering plants and pollinators would also be part of our complex Goldilocks consciousness. Our awareness of this fragile existence should encourage us to be the best version of ourselves and enjoy every moment.…
> Anthropomorphism
I don't think the article or I have made any references to anthropomorphism.
Re: Is the Sun Conscious? (2021) [pdf]
#277Earlier quoted context omitted.
you say gaining new information from out of body experiences are a fact. what's your evidence to back it up? I treat those kinds of stories the same way I'd treat an alien abduction or bigfoot story. humans are unreliable narrators. have there been any successful reproducible experiments on it?
No, there were no scientific experiments to prove it. However, in absence of concrete proofs of either theory, both are equally probable to be true. The theory that consciousness arises from brain activity alone is just an assumption based on other research. It has never been properly proven or disproven either.
Well, it is not "brain activity alone", there are always light waves, forces, chemicals, and a lot of other things, acting on the brain from "outside" of the body, through some very strange receptor routs, but the "information" somehow travels. And we know 100% that for a lot of receptors, the firing rates depend on the intensity of the stimulus. So, we can see a direct correlation between, say, an applied force and golgi tendon organ firing. And at the same time, we discovered some types of radiation that we cannot see, and yet they can influence distant objects. I think that is pretty weird. So, we found a lot of direct correlations between brain activity and the outside world. Is there some need for an additional invisible field, not covered in current physics?
Re: Is the Sun Conscious? (2021) [pdf]
#278I'm an extremely strong believer that the sun has consciousness. I think there exists quantum processes that causes consciousness and that suns, gravitons, etc. all have it. I likely won't be alive to ever find out, but if someone does discover it, I hope a historian finds this thread :)
I am a strong believer that consciousness has a purpose. It is related to self-replication because consciousness necessitates evolution to come about, and evolution necessitates consciousness to keep the organism alive. They need each other. Evolution is the outer process, consciousness the inner process. Celestial bodies lack the reason & means. Not to mention the slowness of light at cosmic distance. Any consciousn…
Who says things need to operate on our timeframe?
Re: Is the Sun Conscious? (2021) [pdf]
#279Re: Is the Sun Conscious? (2021) [pdf]
#280Earlier quoted context omitted.
>This point of view could be applied to any word, and the extreme result is that you'd negate meaningful or useful communication, or that someone would have to be the arbiter of what is a legitimate concept or not. False. >Between vocabulary, commonly understood meaning, possible meaning, and actual personal experience, there are many detours and jumps. "Dog" as a word, concept/meaning, and experience, has these issu…
>You think you're discussing something profound but it's just vocabulary. Alternatively, you think they're discussing something mundane, but it's actually profound. After all, you think you're discussing something profound, but it might just be vocabulary.
Yes. For example "randomness." Seems mundane, but this simple intuitive concept can't actually be formally defined. I have yet to see an actual algorithm for a truly random number generator.
The profoundness comes from the fact that on the intuitive level we are all hyper aware of what random means. But on the formal level we have no idea what it is.