Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Club for Open-Minded Discussion & Debate

[eyesofastranger]

Dark matter is the mass of stars and planets that escape the big crunch under the control of advanced civilizations that flee the big crunch preserving their valued ecosystems.

With my primitive braincase I try to imagine the multidimensional existence of these beings and preserving an ecosystem of time and gravity seems very anthropomorphic. But who's to say. Time does give order to what must be disorder even to our multidimensional *ods.
The idea that dark matter has gravity that leaks here has been explored since the discovery that we have unaccounted for gravity. The current argument says all that exists in the universe fits well into the inverse-square law.
The on topic question is can these multidimensional beings provide a vessel for our emotions and emotional attachments. I would suggest without those, what is preserved has nothing to do with the being that was you.

[BigBango]

Dark matter is the mass of stars and planets that escape the big crunch under the control of advanced civilizations that flee the big crunch preserving their valued ecosystems.

With my primitive braincase I try to imagine the multidimensional existence of these beings and preserving an ecosystem of time and gravity seems very anthropomorphic. But who's to say. Time does give order to what must be disorder even to our multidimensional *ods.
The idea that dark matter has gravity that leaks here has been explored since the discovery that we have unaccounted for gravity. The current argument says all that exists in the universe fits well into the inverse-square law.
The on topic question is can these multidimensional beings provide a vessel for our emotions and emotional attachments. I would suggest without those, what is preserved has nothing to do with the being that was you.

What I would like to accomplish in this post is to try to clear up what I consider a misunderstanding on your part of my thesis and at the same time make clearer to you what the connection is between our pre-universe soul and our "experiential" neurological self of this world. Of course, that would include how it is that these beings "provide a vessel for our emotions and emotional attachments".

Your use of the word "dimensional", when considering these beings, reminds me very much about how I first came to develop this thesis. I did not resolve those problems of multi-dimensionality until I realized that it was simply a case of the pre-universe evolving "fractally" into what we recognize as our familiar universe. So when I speak of "beings" in the pre-universe I am speaking about living beings, planets and stars that have atoms of a lower fractal layer of reality, not a different dimension of the time and space we live in. Hence, instead of a problem of dimensionality it is simply a problem of "scale".

So to wind down this discussion before I completely confuse you, I will just say that these fractally smaller entities of the pre-universe are still within us constructing the vessels within which they can experience the post Big Bang world that was once their only world.

[eyesofastranger]

@BigBanjo
I like your idea that the construct for our sentience is found in this dimension but deep down the Mandelbrot rabbit hole. The problem I have is dark matter has measurable gravity so should be detectable by instrumentation, lower fractal layer or not.
The other dead end I'm reaching is our connection to the fractal entities is the basis of consciousness, which crunch/bang evolved consciousness independently?
Anyone tackling dark matter has tried to create a hypothesis for the cancelling effect of dark energy, in this unknown battle dark energy is the slight winner.
Don't worry about confusion, we seek confusion. Your thesis leads all the way back to a creator. That is under the vague description you have provided so far.

[BigBango]

@BigBanjo
I like your idea that the construct for our sentience is found in this dimension but deep down the Mandelbrot rabbit hole.

Yes that is a good analogy. I like Alice in Wonderland! Remember though, I am only projecting down one vertical level, the rest is speculation I choose to mostly skip. Although I find Tamminen's assertion that the "subject" is ontologically primary is attractive and yet is not necessarily God. The complex number plane of Mandelbrot is only 2 dimensional. My thesis asserts 3D fractal layers.

The problem I have is dark matter has measurable gravity so should be detectable by instrumentation, lower fractal layer or not.

The problem I have with this statement is you first claim "dark matter has measurable gravity". Then you say it "should be detectable by instrumentation". I think you have gone too far down the rabbit hole. You may be wishing to make a distinction about "instrumentation". That is dark matter's gravity is deduced from observing rotational velocity of galaxies and then deducing the amount of gravity dark matter must have to account for those facts. Of course instrumentation was used to establish those deductions. No graviton has actually been directly observed and only recently has its existence been firmly confirmed, yet still indirectly. Relativity just establishes the curvature of space around mass. It really doesn't need the graviton.

The other dead end I'm reaching is our connection to the fractal entities is the basis of consciousness, which crunch/bang evolved consciousness independently?

I wish that sentence of yours was a little clearer. Are you talking about multiple "quantum fluctuations" that are horizontal components to our Big Bang or are you talking about vertical Big Bangs that correspond to Penrose' worlds that create one pre universe after another. In my thesis there are only vertical fractal layers. I claim the "dark matter" that we measure but do not see in (our -1) fractal layer is quite visible to the "creatures" of that level. In fact, the reason that matter exists is because those entities, of that layer, along with their in planet/star associations, have saved that matter from the Big Crunch/Big Bang of all of their galactic centers. So to us all that dark matter of (our-1) level has been Stewarded by the roots of our consciousness.
[/quote]

[The Beast]

I could hold a rabbit’s foot but, it would interfere with my science. It is worth noting that exotic baryons might be the source of what is considered non-baryonic matter. In a true fractal dimension, the infinite regress will take us to a chaos theory… and to consciousness. Here necessity and free will might get their grand unified theory.

[BigBango]

I could hold a rabbit’s foot but, it would interfere with my science. It is worth noting that exotic baryons might be the source of what is considered non-baryonic matter. In a true fractal dimension, the infinite regress will take us to a chaos theory… and to consciousness. Here necessity and free will might get their grand unified theory.

Beast, very interesting speculations on your part. I had not realized that chaos theory has taken a turn toward the infinite regress of fractals. I hope that this development is not just an example of how hard it is to understand fractals; therefore our minds are in chaos.

My thesis puts the "subject" in the fractal and therefore it puts the preservation of "the identity of the subject" into the similar form of the higher level fractal preservation of that form.

[BigBango]

There is a good deal of controversy about the role of aesthetic display by males and sometimes females to attract mates and whether or not those brilliant features are a product of natural selection. The controversy revolves around the fact that often these colorful attractors, which are genetically reproduced, create a mutation that is demonstrably less adaptable to its environment. I.e. birds that can no longer fly because their bone structure is no longer hollow, like birds that can fly, but instead their bones become dense and laden with aesthetically pleasing attractors for the opposite sex and the loss of the ability to fly.

The reason I bring this up is that the literature generally recognizes this exception as an inconsistent application of the theory of natural selection yet it has no deeper theory for its explanation. The major problem is that once we accept simple physical monism for the evolution of consciousness, and therefor the role of natural selection to evolve consciousness and its aesthetic components we are forced to give even the simplest of creatures the mental hutzpah to make aesthetic judgments about potential mates.

In my theory these aesthetically attractive features are created by the lower fractal level of reality. This lower level is technologically advanced compared to us but cannot really see the objects it lets evolve on our level. This is because its vision is based on a lower fractal level of atoms. The life in this low level of dark matter lets life evolve on our level according to the genetic packages it creates to sustain evolutionary development of higher level genetic creatures. The caveat to letting this evolution evolve according to the principle of natural selection had a beginning which produced creatures like dinosaurs that evolved into energy producers for those micro galactic civilizations imbedded in the those creatures. These initial beginnings that are in our history changed over time. The lower fractal level entered a political phase, call it species nationalism. In that phase they required a technological aesthetic summary of these creatures that they were evolving. While they could not directly see the creatures that were evolving they could perceive aesthetic impressions made by their own technology that was designed to capture their essence. In a sense this became the politics of their creature evolution. It was like a 4 page summary of a Mueller investigation into the culpability of a president to commit obstruction of justice. From that point on in evolution it became important for species to reflect the aesthetics of the lower fractal level, natural evolution de dammed.

[eyesofastranger]

BigBango
If you could offer any equations or replicatable experiments that even hint at what your saying I would recommend publishing at once. Even if all you could provide was a direction in understanding something like the Cambrian explosion the results would reopen Dover and Scopes as well as a mob of underhanded greedy evangelist types slipping on their own ejaculate trying to get up your driveway.
The topic of human consciousness surviving bodily death would remain unanswered. If our consciousness becomes one with such an advanced thought cognizance nothing of the simple human animal would remain. By your own admission that plane is not in tune with our own. By human animal understanding would we consider that a form of survival?

[BigBango]

BigBango
If you could offer any equations or replicatable experiments that even hint at what your saying I would recommend publishing at once. Even if all you could provide was a direction in understanding something like the Cambrian explosion the results would reopen Dover and Scopes as well as a mob of underhanded greedy evangelist types slipping on their own ejaculate trying to get up your driveway.
The topic of human consciousness surviving bodily death would remain unanswered. If our consciousness becomes one with such an advanced thought cognizance nothing of the simple human animal would remain. By your own admission that plane is not in tune with our own. By human animal understanding would we consider that a form of survival?

Good post eyes! I appreciate the humor and I have spent some time worrying about creationists ejaculate clogging my plumbing.

Remember the Taoist saying "First there is a mountain then there is no mountain and then there is a mountain". So it is with evolution. When first I conceived my theory it seemed to me I might be asking for strange bedfellows. However, on further reflection, I realized that there is both natural selection and creative design. Let me first focus on the role of creationism.

In my theory our soul/mind originated in lower fractal levels of reality. I am asserting that this soul/mind survives our bodily death and is responsible for embedding itself in this higher fractal level of molecules which we are deluded into thinking all came from quantum fluctuations of "The Nothingness". I do have mathematical equations that I have developed that estimate the size of these lower level life forces. Their whole galactic (N-1)ecology would be around a Plank volume in our N level. This is very important because while there is an element of creationism in this thesis it has to be measured according to both its size and technological prowess. Its size is so small compared to us that it would be completely impotent for creationism on our higher N level if it were not for its extensive integration with other galactic ecosystems and its advanced, compared to us, technological prowess.

At the same time, we cannot make the mistake that this soul/mind is not an integral part of us but is some external influence that gives birth to us. The simple human animal still remains as an evolving mixture of genes, basically mechanical and designed to evolve. These creatures designed the cell to be used as their home, but that is about as far as its creationism actively functioned. From that point on, having cell imbedded genes and the mechanisms for constructing multi-celled organisms, they let themselves evolve in this N+1 level of reality.

[h_k_s]

NDE reports give the impression that consciousness could continue after death but that's not proof. It might just be an impression caused by the dynamics of dying brains.

We will all have to just wait and see when the time comes. May we all spend many more years in the dark about the issue.

I completely agree with Greta on this issue.

The dying brain gives people strange experiences which, if they happen to survive the ordeal and recover to real life, they bring back the stories with them. All these stories like a hole or tunnel leading to a bright shining place at the end of the tunnel remind me of the tunnel vision frame that pops up whenever the brain is deprived of oxygen, such as in aviation or astronaut experiments, or in my own case while on scuba and having dived way deeper than is safe based on modern cautions.

There have not been any reports for thousands of years by now of dead people returning to life after death. Thus it is difficult to believe the former claims.

Currently this whole issue falls within the realm of religion, not of science nor of philosophy. End of story unfortunately.

[eyesofastranger]

h_k_s and Greta are both correct of course. End of story.
For this reason we lost the original poster, he should have stuck it out while we indulge in the very slightly on topic discussion of what sort of mechanism could maintain a consciousness after death?
The human imagination can conjure ghosts, they obey gravity while passing through matter. That's why I have never seen one, all mine are stuck to the planets core. However I can't refute recordings of vibrations containing voices that seemingly leak from the past. Not reality TV shows but genuine controlled conditions experiments. Photons have almost no mass so maybe they can leak through time a bit but voice vibrations contain huge mass.
The original question is a dead end but the wild speculation has been entertaining.

[BigBango]

h_k_s and Greta are both correct of course. End of story.
For this reason we lost the original poster, he should have stuck it out while we indulge in the very slightly on topic discussion of what sort of mechanism could maintain a consciousness after death?
The human imagination can conjure ghosts, they obey gravity while passing through matter. That's why I have never seen one, all mine are stuck to the planets core. However I can't refute recordings of vibrations containing voices that seemingly leak from the past. Not reality TV shows but genuine controlled conditions experiments. Photons have almost no mass so maybe they can leak through time a bit but voice vibrations contain huge mass.
The original question is a dead end but the wild speculation has been entertaining.

I do not think that our conversation about whether or not "Consciousness Survives Bodily Death" should end on whether ghosts do or do not pass through matter and still obey gravity. That is a false straw man. It is also false that h_K_s and Greta conclude that the truth of consciousness after death rests on the veracity of NDE's.

There is a misconception that the survival of consciousness after death must some how preserve the material body that we are familiar with, therefore our "bodies" remain as existents in a slightly compromised form. The truth is that the consciousness of the lower fractal level remains intact while shedding the constructed consciousness of the higher fractal level after the death of the constructed body.

[eyesofastranger]

The truth is that the consciousness of the lower fractal level remains intact while shedding the constructed consciousness of the higher fractal level after the death of the constructed body.

I was trying desperately not to end it. Ghosts obeying gravity is a very valid point. The human mind conjured the ghost and the NDE. That part is a dead end.
But I agree with you fully that the consciousness leaves behind information. I don't necessarily disagree with your thesis but. I think we all know Sagan's aphorism. Extraordinary claims.... So for now I choose to respectfully disagree for reasons of a head full of other speculations that also make sense. Especially on the subject of dark energy/matter.
I'm currently dabbling at writing a work of total fiction on the subject. As a work of fiction my definition is more long haired than anything that could produce a thesis.
I do have much more faith in our instrumentation and mathematical models than you do. Leaving me admittedly in the dark for an explanation. Not a position to argue from but certainly a position with an absolutely open mind.
I encourage anything more you can add BigBangJoe

[Felix]

eyesofastranger said: "The human mind conjured the ghost and the NDE"

That's an assumption. These experiences may be what Terence McKenna called "true hallucinations." Visionaries and people who possess unusual abilities are often considered mad by those who do not share those abilities. The assumption is that everyone perceives reality in pretty much the same way and that all human minds operate in a similar manner, but they do not. There can be a wide gulf of consciousness between the genius and the common man.

[eyesofastranger]

Felix mentioned "true hallucinations."
I'm not saying there is no such thing but I haven't seen proof. Although it may be of some disadvantage I am a true believer in the need for instrumentation to confirm what the mind has experienced. What is scientifically provable is dysfunction in temporal lobes and more likely is a personal misreading of ones own fusiform gyrus. No disorder needed we are all born with that region that allows us to see faces in plug sockets and Jesus on our toast. Like any other right/left brain function the left finds the pattern and the right sorts out the reality. The science of perception as it pertains to humans gets very muddied but instruments don't lie.
I don't need an entire lab set up, a cellphone pic would do just fine as instrumentation.