0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Quote from: Alan McDougall on 26/06/2016 16:33:19Yes our concept of consciousness is the same!So which of these list do you think are qualified as conscious observer? what makes the difference?-human-chimpanzee-rat-lizard-spider-worm-jellyfish-venus flytrap-apple tree-bacteria-virus-computer with alphago-iphone 6s-curiosity rover-automatic car-solar cell-photon multiplier-thermometer
Yes our concept of consciousness is the same!
Beginning with the Big Bang followed by the Inflationary Period over vast amounts of intervening time, it would be without merit to suggest that some form of consciousness was ever present from that first moment until now. My answer to the question would be an unequivocal (NO)
Fixation is no substitute for observation.
Does the universe need a conscious observer for it to exist?Your Thoughts?Alan
"Observation" has shown scientifically that on the fundamental scale at least particles react to being observed.
Quote from: Alan McDougall on 27/06/2016 08:50:36"Observation" has shown scientifically that on the fundamental scale at least particles react to being observed.So you admit that, on your scale, a photon multiplier is conscious. That raises a very important ethical question: if murder is bad, can I scrap my car, or eat vegetables, with a clear conscience? The only rational alternative answer to your original question is "obviously not".
The only possible answers I could get is that, time and not universe, is the product of our conscious, is occurs a long the observer is alive and stops and cease to exist at the moment the conscious die...
Quote from: alancalverd on 27/06/2016 09:50:33Quote from: Alan McDougall on 27/06/2016 08:50:36"Observation" has shown scientifically that on the fundamental scale at least particles react to being observed.So you admit that, on your scale, a photon multiplier is conscious. That raises a very important ethical question: if murder is bad, can I scrap my car, or eat vegetables, with a clear conscience? The only rational alternative answer to your original question is "obviously not".Your answer is highly rational, it makes as much sense as most of dear 'Boxes" statements do, and you can do a lot better than post such inane nonsense.Nonsense remains nonsense regardless of the source of the nonsense, be it from God, Albert Einstein or a moderator on the particular forum, nonsense is nonsense period! Alan
I beg to differ.
Quote from: jeffreyH on 27/06/2016 13:01:38I beg to differ.I do as well.......................Suggesting that consciousness was present at the Big Bang sounds a great deal like NONSENCE too!
Quote from: Alan McDougall on 25/06/2016 17:37:23Does the universe need a conscious observer for it to exist?Your Thoughts?AlanYou surprise me Alan. This is a perfectly valid question which should have been placed in the b]Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology[/b] where questions like this belong. This forum is for new theories, and this is not a theory but a question. A good question in fact.The answer to your question is no. It's inconceivable for a universe to exist which depends on the existence of such an observer. Such observers are created by such universes by the process of evolution. If such a universe can't exist before they're created then they couldn't be created. You don't believe that the universe didn't exist before someone was around to take notice of it, do you? If you did then where did such observers come from? Why do you think they'd be required to exist for the universe to be able to exist. Recall the history of the universe from the Big Bang onward. Not even life existed before there were suns which went supernova which created the elements from which we are constructed.
How can you possible know that?, who says the big bang was the beginning of all existence or the universe is everything that exists and "there is no need too "shout" to get your point over.?
or some form of no-material reality beyond human comprehension caused the universe to exist by contemplation.
Quote from: Alan McDougall on 27/06/2016 16:13:09How can you possible know that?, who says the big bang was the beginning of all existence or the universe is everything that exists and "there is no need too "shout" to get your point over.?I really didn't mean to offend anyone Alan so I'll offer my apology to all those who may have taken it that way.Quote from: Alan McDougallor some form of no-material reality beyond human comprehension caused the universe to exist by contemplation.To repeat a reply you made to one of my offerings: "How can you possibly know that?"
My limited logic seems to insist that everything must have had a beginning?
Is that so silly of me?