fuzoid wrote:Since movies seem to be a source that you rely on for your evidence, then picture it similar to The Matrix, minus the robots and human batteries. You are living a life of illusion that, similar to The Matrix, might have been programmed. For all you know, we are nothing more than computer code being played out on some mainframe somewhere.

xamuyees wrote:Not a movie, it's called "Documented evidence."

Interesting, the movie, The Entity, is not a movie but in reality, documented evidence! This kind of logic sure does explain an awful lot about your posts.

You see yourself living a life of illusion similar to The Matrix, not me. I live a real life.

Uh uh, you're not putting words in my mouth. And since you missed it the first time, allow me to post it again so I can explain it to you; Since movies seem to be a source that you rely on for your evidence, then picture it similar to The Matrix, minus the robots and human batteries.

Actually, there is nothing to explain since my comment is self explanatory! Your above statement about documented evidence proves my point quite nicely. Thank you for being so accommodating. <grin>

We are not like computers with programs and codes, but don't take my word for it, see for yourself.

Do you even pay attention to what you read or do you get all your information in video format? I never said we were like computers, I stated that for all you know, we are nothing more than computer CODE! There is a huge difference between the two. And since you claim to have a degree in science, can you please explain the difference? Actually, you don't need a degree in anything to answer this one. An elementary school child could answer it. Anyway, the point I was trying to make is, contrary to what your physical senses tell you, this universe is an illusion. It is the collapse of the wavefunction, which is dependent upon consciousness. Sorry, I didn't make the rules. So if you don't like it, talk to your creator about it.

fuzoid wrote:However, I do plan on learning a little more about him so I can judge for myself from an informed position. Something you appear not to be willing to do yourself.

xamuyees wrote:What? you can't be serious. I've got my science degree over a decade ago and am aware what science has to say about life.

LOL!!!! A degree in science? You'll have to pardon me for not believing you. But thank you for the laugh. Anyway, what university? What major?

And yes I am serious! If you even had one iota of a clue, then you would understand what I'm talking about. But since you reject it out of hand without supporting your position, this tells me you have no desire to verify any of it.

I have not yet point out the flaws of those theories you've supported, but as Dr. Taff said, theories are speculations at best.

Yet? Please.... do your best. In fact, this is the very thing I've been trying to goad you into. So go for it. And if your Dr. Taff believes scientific theories are speculation at best, then there is nothing further I need to learn about him because he is a quack and a liar. As someone with a so-called degree in science, do you even understand the definition of scientific theory? Does Dr. Taff? If you truly had a degree in science, then you would have immediately recognized Dr. Taff's comment as false. And since you didn't know any better.... well... you know what I'm getting at.

Are you sure he didn't mean hypothesis?

Dr. Kaku said every physics text book on earth is now wrong

And Dr. Kaku is suddenly an expert on every physics book in print? Anyway, he is probably correct since physics is a dynamic discipline that is constantly being updated in accordance with the latest findings.

With all these flaws yet you still believe it.

With all what flaws? Please do not make general statements. Anyway, if you're alluding to the wavefunction, it is not flawed. Actually, far from it!

Soon they will adapt something like "God Theory."

And you know this how? Is this sort of like the "God particle?"

It seems to me that the more you argue the more mistake you make and the more idiotic you look. Sorry, but I have break it to you.

Hey, if I'm making mistakes, then I expect someone to point them out to me. The problem is, you have yet to point out anything I have stated as wrong. But you do make an awful lot of unsupported accusations. So don't just accuse, show me where I'm wrong! If I am wrong, then I will be the first to admit it.

fuzoid wrote:Why should you? To support your position? To lend a little credibility to your arguments? I don't know, why don't you tell me why you refuse to support your arguments, I'm not a mind reader!

xamuyees wrote:Why should I repeat myself? If you're an intelligent person you shouldn't have missed it unless your perception of your intelligent level was just an illusion.

Miss what? My above quote was in regards to asking you to clarify why you brought the parapsychological into the equation, which you never have. I have asked on multiple occasions but you blew it off each time. So there is nothing to repeat since you never did explain why!

And for someone who constantly makes spelling and grammatical errors, forgets what we're discussing, cites movies as evidence, cites fraudulent scientists, cites parks as evidence for Noah, etc..., you are in no position to question the intelligence of anyone. Let alone mine!

Yeah, I'm sure that degree is serving you quite nicely.

Anyway, the point I was trying to make is, contrary to what your physical senses tell you, this universe is an illusion. It is the collapse of the wavefunction, which is dependent upon consciousness

How do you know this?

Is it only your faith you have in this theory, much like the faith people have in the exsistance god?

If I remember correctly, there was a recent experiment where they unwittingly picked up a prediction of the holographic universe theory. They are doing more tests on it currently.

Gee wrote:

Anyway, the point I was trying to make is, contrary to what your physical senses tell you, this universe is an illusion. It is the collapse of the wavefunction, which is dependent upon consciousness

How do you know this?

Is it only your faith you have in this theory, much like the faith people have in the exsistance god?

Sorry for the late response. According to quantum theory, all matter in the universe is both wave and particle, which has been confirmed (it is scientific fact). What form it takes depends on whether it's being observed, or not. For example, a physicist posed a thought experiment regarding a room. I'm paraphrasing but it went something like, if you close the door to a room and there is no one (or any other form of consciousness) in it, does it cease to exist as we understand it? The only logical conclusion to this thought experiment was, YES! When we remove consciousness from the equation, what we call solid matter reverts to its wave form. In other words, consciousness is an integral component to what we view as physical reality. It has been the skeleton in the closet for almost 100 years now for the strict materialist. Allow me to also point out that observation does not necessarily mean observation by sight alone. Observation can be any of our [limited] 5 senses. For example, a blind person cannot see, but they can touch. And it is their touch that converts the wavefunction into what they perceive as a solid object.

Enter the holographic principle....

First proposed by theoretical physicist, Gerard 't Hooft, the holographic principal has recently gained empirical support through the GEO600 gravity wave detection experiment, although further, more precise testing is required to confirm the findings. If confirmed, then this means our so-called physical universe is actually an illusion being projected from the 2D event horizon of our universe. In other words, our universe can be described as a wavefunction and it is consciousness which interprets the information embedded within the wave into what we view as objective reality. This brings us back to our 5 senses. Although our brain would also have to be part of the wavefunction, which implies our true consciousness resides outside of and independent of the brain, for whatever the reason (or purpose), all of our experiences seem to be within our brain. The seat of the soul, so to speak. However, this is illusion as well. Remember, everything we believe we perceive as being out there is really nothing more than electrical impulses within our brain. For example, the reason we see is because of photon reflection. Photons from whatever the source reflect off any objects as light waves. The information about the object(s) you are seeing is embedded within the light waves. It is our brain which converts this information into electrical impulses which in turn is converted to an image. Such is the nature of our reality! An illusion!

Now here's where it gets a little sticky. Once we come to the realization that our reality is an illusion and it is consciousness which creates it, what does that have to say about our true selves if our bodies are also part of the illusion? On that note.....

fuzoid
http://www.live365.com/stations/fuzoid

More info about the entity:

Gee wrote:

Anyway, the point I was trying to make is, contrary to what your physical senses tell you, this universe is an illusion. It is the collapse of the wavefunction, which is dependent upon consciousness

How do you know this?

Is it only your faith you have in this theory, much like the faith people have in the exsistance god?

Gee,

As promised in my PM, here is the additional information I stumbled across:

"In 1923, almost a decade after Einstein published his general relativity theory (no longer a theory, of course: now it is a law), the French physicist Louis de Broglie introduced an idea that was even more bizarre in its assertions than Einstein's claim that matter really was a form of energy.

"De Broglie claimed that all matter has related to it a wave length and a frequency of that wave, a certain number of wave cycles per second. Not only had humanity learned that matter was not matter, we now had to believe that everything is a wave. Everything you and I concluded. I believe that last sentence was a typo and should have read, Everything, you and I included. Continuing on here... Seventy years of experiments have sustained both Einstein's and de Broglie's preposterous, counterintuitive claims.

"The floor upon which you stand and the bedrock that supports a skyscraper are 99.999% empty space. What we perceive as solid matter is actually de Broglie's waves separated by open space, made impermeable by invisible, immaterial fields of force that somehow pervade the space. The world simply is not as it seems. A superficial reading of nature finds differentiation and disparate entities - stars and stones and bottled water and even life and death. Reading that same nature at a deeper level reveals that it's all a manifestation of a single underlying unity."

"The substructure of all existence, we suddenly realize, is totally ethereal, an idea, wisdom. Or in Hebrew - emet - an all encompassing reality. Emet is the ultimate building block from which all we see and feel is constructed. Just as the secondary substructure of all matter is something as ethereal as energy, as per Einstein's fantastic insight, so, the primary substructure of energy is still more elusive. Existence is the expression of an idea, an eternal consciousness made tangible. We are the idea of God.

"If we can discover that idea, we will have ascertained not only the basis for the unity that underlies all existence, but most important, the source of that unity. "We will have encountered the soul of God."

Source: http://www.geraldschroeder.com/existence.aspx

Gerald Schroeder is both an MIT trained physicist and a scholar of the Torah. His book, Genesis and the Big Bang, is largely responsible for my renunciation of religions in general, all religious dogma and for the path I am currently traveling. And while the path I am now on has taken many twists and turns, it is still the same path of science that I started on after reading Schroeder's book.

I know this material is bound to raise all sorts of questions, so fire away.

Looking forward to your response.

fuzoid
http://www.live365.com/stations/fuzoid

fuzoid wrote:Now here's where it gets a little sticky. Once we come to the realization that our reality is an illusion and it is consciousness which creates it, what does that have to say about our true selves if our bodies are also part of the illusion? On that note.....

What is your point? spell it out if you can. Would "crazy/stupid idea" be best to describe it?

fuzoid wrote:Now here's where it gets a little sticky. Once we come to the realization that our reality is an illusion and it is consciousness which creates it, what does that have to say about our true selves if our bodies are also part of the illusion? On that note.....

Guest wrote:What is your point? spell it out if you can.

What's my point? Are you that dense that you can't read what I wrote? Here, let me spell it out for you... again. Your reality is an illusion. There, I spelled it out for you. Are you happy now?

Guest wrote:Would "crazy/stupid idea" be best to describe it?

Oh, sort of like your continued insistence that The Entity is documented evidence? <chuckle> Once again, if you want to deny the science behind the truth, then get rid of all your creature comforts that quantum physics made possible.

Have you been hovering over the NDE forum just waiting for me to make a post so you could pounce and make some asinine comments? How pathetic.

I wonder if this qualifies as stalking?

I wonder if this qualifies as stalking?

How do you know? It's just a guest. There's a guest talking at me at the moment and I don't know who it is. The Guests need to get a username. It's probably some random stranger who happened to see your post, think 'New Age BS', and go straight to the insult.

My suggestion to the admins is that if the same IP makes more than 2 posts in a day under 'Guest', they are given a choice: get a username, or be given a signature (applied to the IP) saying, "Lazy bastard".

fuzoid wrote:

fuzoid wrote:Now here's where it gets a little sticky. Once we come to the realization that our reality is an illusion and it is consciousness which creates it, what does that have to say about our true selves if our bodies are also part of the illusion? On that note.....

Guest wrote:What is your point? spell it out if you can.

What's my point? Are you that dense that you can't read what I wrote? Here, let me spell it out for you... again. Your reality is an illusion. There, I spelled it out for you. Are you happy now?

Guest wrote:Would "crazy/stupid idea" be best to describe it?

Oh, sort of like your continued insistence that The Entity is documented evidence? <chuckle> Once again, if you want to deny the science behind the truth, then get rid of all your creature comforts that quantum physics made possible.

Have you been hovering over the NDE forum just waiting for me to make a post so you could pounce and make some asinine comments? How pathetic.
I wonder if this qualifies as stalking?

Excuse me, I raised 2 questions and you're in a perfection position to answer those questions in whichever way best fit you but rather, you decided to respond with an asinine attitude. Remember this "I know this material is bound to raise all sorts of questions, so fire away" above? I think it is naive and pathetic of you to give me all these.
Is it true that I can't read what you wrote? Or is it that you don't know what you wrote. Allow me to show you what you wrote. The true meaning of the word "sticky" was "confusing," isn't it? You made a statement ended with a question followed by a incomplete statement; and this is the reason I asked to clarify your understanding or thought, instead you decided to mock my comments in an effort to hide the bosh!t you yourself couldn't understand. Let me tell you what it is about this illusion of yours.
Since I am an illusion to you and you are an illusion to me the consciousness within us are also illusion because consciousness has to have a mind and a mind needs a body. You also said the universe is an illusion, so then particle and wave are also illusion. Therefore everything is an illusion. The idea that the universe is an illusion, is also an illusion. What does this mean? This means that this theory/ideology is just a bunch of bosh!t and some body still think it's worth believing it.