Sometimes though the bolt breaks.
Trans Dimensional Atomic ReMolecularization.This is not yet within the mathematical framework that I am aware of. And I have no idea how deal with this concept. Perhaps via the extended "information theory". But how? Million dollar question.
What classifies, in your mind, as an objective description?Are all "the laws of physics" subjective in this sense? But then is there also an objective description?
Well that May 29th of this year session you quoted from earlier also does mention:What classifies, in your mind, as an objective description?
In the case of the puzzle, it seems to me that the final picture/goal is subjective in the sense that everyone 'knows' the puzzle is designed to be fitted into that picture, but it doesn't need to be that way. The 'meaning' or 'goal' or 'target' is determined by an intelligent mind. A single person, however, can assign each puzzle piece a number or letter, and then create a sequence that will serve as a very secure password. The 'meaning' or 'goal' in this case is also determined by an intelligent mind, but only for one person. What makes one particular possibility 'meaningful' is the fact that it is chosen as a target by an intelligent mind.
So are the 'laws' of physics similar? Maybe the only thing that makes them 'objective' is that they apply to everything in the known universe, but for God, they are 'subjective'? There are 'proper' (subjective) ways to solve jigsaw puzzles, and there are 'proper' (Holy Subjective) ways for particles and large cosmic bodies to interact.
And if there is an element of subjectivity to laws, even if it's divine, maybe that can also account for some psi phenomena? Maybe the 'laws' can be bent with the right knowledge? Like the shifting of probability distributions, or the changing of certain mathematical relationships or constants?
Q: (Ark) What kind of mathematics is needed to describe consciousness?
This question is, in a way, related to the question of the "objective" description of reality. But can we say that anything objectively exists? There is no discourse in physics that would allow the word "objective" to be unambiguously defined. We can find it sooner in theology or philosophy. In philosophical methodology, there are words like "immanent" and "transcendent".I am finding this discussion very interesting, even with my limited math knowledge. But I have a question, don't things like consciousness, the information field, or even gravity, exist in multiple states? Do they not exist mostly in potential, they are there, everywhere, but only when the are utilized do they become manifest, at least to us?
A 22° halo is an optical phenomenon that belongs to the family of ice-crystal halos. Its form is a ring with an apparent radius of approximately 22° around the Sun or Moon. When visible around the Moon, it is called a moon ring or winter halo. It forms as direct sunlight or moonlight is refracted in millions of hexagonal ice crystalssuspended in the atmosphere.
People have different levels of empathy. Some have the ability to empathize with others, others do not. I personally like to read about the emotional stories of others. They inspire me, sometimes they remind me of my own stories, other times I think that I would never have acted that way in a certain situation.I was thinking this morning about whether what each of us was doing or events that occurred yesterday to us as individuals has any benefit to others reading in forums and having discussions, the group. Of course it does or has the potential. The problem is what and how to share and communicate these things that are imbued with emotion, context, complexity and background information.
Feeling someone's presence is also a characteristic experience, and it has happened to me many times. However, I know from experience that the mere feeling of being present does not necessarily mean that the person is dead, although this usually applies to the deceased.Nevertheless, her presence was felt and it was said in the eulogy that "she was smiling down on us from heaven."
Here again we face a very difficult question. We have still not defined the concept of consciousness, and this problem can be viewed from many perspectives. For example, panpsychism implies the existence of multiple degrees of consciousness. In this approach, every being is conscious. The only difference is in the degree of this consciousness.And the next question is: is there all-encompassing consciousness? That includes all, atoms, stars and us? Very informative post!
Is the human freq band of perception related to our physical equipment, biochemical processes or something else? Is “being“ related to that equipment or to consciousness? Or both? Certainly if you take a drug or get hooked up to some electrodes or go into some meditative trance, that can alter the band of perception. That may even add new experiences and perspectives on being Even if only temporarily. State of being and band of perception are certainly bi-directionally inter-related but I don’t think that if you alter one, you destroy the other.Not only mathematical How can we change the frequency band of our perception in practice, without destroying our being?