"Your Brain Works Like a Radio" and other mind matters

[justdrew]

LYRICS by Jeannette Obstoj

We are passengers in time
Lost in motion, locked together
Day and night, by trick of light
But I must take another journey
We must meet with other names
Ooh we must meet with other names

You touched my heart so deeply
You rescued me now free me
Don`t watch me cry just see me go
I`ll take away the strongest feelings
You will ever know

There will be no more isolation
In our secret separation
You touched my heart so deeply, you rescued me
Now free me

We are passengers in time
Lost in motion, locked together
Day and night, by trick of light
But I must take another journey
We must meet with other names
If you hold me you will hurt me
Be brave

There will be no more isolation
In our secret separation
You touched my heart so deeply, you rescued me
Now free me

We are matching spark and flame
Caught in endless repetition
Life for life we`ll be the same
I must leave before you burn me
I am the stranger who deserts you only to love you
In another life

There will be no more isolation
In our secret separation
You touched my heart so deeply, you rescued me
Now free me

I`ll bear one precious scar that only you will know
Passengers in time
Free me

[Hammer of Los]

...

So some Beings may be larger than others. Very Large Beings may even make deals to "feed" energy to smaller entities, on the understanding that the sponsored entity will go out and use a portion of it's activities to provide more energy up to the VLB. A spiritual ponzi scheme if you will.

Justdrew, that piece you wrote above makes no sense whatsoever to me.

Unless you believe in psychic vampires, I guess.

Do you believe in psychic vampires?

I don't need anyone else's energy.

I have more than enough for my needs.

But BrandonD is a most wize bird.

And you all know I love the bendy one.

Our now unique state of being has devolved/descended through the higher vibrational realms from the ubiquitous dark energy/spirit of cosmos into the unique time - space dependent human to develop self awareness, and when the prerequisite degree of humility in the presence of cosmic consciousness has been realized, the self aware aspect evolved as a result of this devolution, ascends to the higher cosmic vibrational realms as an immortal.

Simply put...from unself-aware pure spiritual perfection --- to self-aware impure non-spiritual imperfection----to self ware pure spiritual perfection.

xxx.
...

[justdrew]

to answer your question, nope, but there's a lesser meaning of that that does happen among people, but it's not probable that it involves any significant amount of energy transference of the kind I'm talking about. When I say the "smaller being" (you could also phrase that, "less developed," or even "lower") would go out and bring energy to the VLB, it would be by such methods as cultish religion, strange fads, or in anyway that leads others to provide energy willingly to the VLB (convincing other to pay worship; any sort of directed thinking MAY provide some low-entropy energy to the thing thought of).

anyway, the big post on 5 is densely packed. I'm generally talking about energy in very physics based meaning, ie... the ability to do "work" (look up the definition of work also and consider how it can apply to anything, including the ordering/changing of information, however it's stored and processed.)

[smoking since 1879]

Ben D:

Dr Hammeroff makes the mistake of thinking consciousness is a thing.
It is not, it is a process.
If it were a property of quarks or whatever then my sofa (by virtue of mass) must be very conscious.

BrandonD:
Thanks for your counter examples, they really prove the rule i was trying to posit.

Peace

[justdrew]

actually Smoking, if you look here at more detail on their theory you'll find they are describing the process and it's constituents.

their theory seems to me to have a lot in common with Robert Hecht-Nielsen's work on "the fundamental mechanism of cognition" ( see here )

[Ben D]

Ben D:

Dr Hammeroff makes the mistake of thinking consciousness is a thing.
It is not, it is a process.
If it were a property of quarks or whatever then my sofa (by virtue of mass) must be very conscious.

The action of the omnipresent quantum vacuum on and in the microtubes of the axons of the brain's neurons inducing modifications to the ego consciousness is not a thing but a process, I think you will agree. Moreover he is implying the zero point energy nature of the quantum vacuum is the source of consciousness, ie. proto-consciousness.

[smoking since 1879]

Ben D:

Dr Hammeroff makes the mistake of thinking consciousness is a thing.
It is not, it is a process.
If it were a property of quarks or whatever then my sofa (by virtue of mass) must be very conscious.

The action of the omnipresent quantum vacuum on and in the microtubes of the axons of the brain's neurons inducing modifications to the ego consciousness is not a thing but a process, I think you will agree. Moreover he is implying the zero point energy nature of the quantum vacuum is the source of consciousness, ie. proto-consciousness.

No, I don't agree.
What absolute reductionist waffle.

Your brain is like a radio in the sense that it is a device that plays only one song. That song is you.

The song plays on the network of neurons that have been wiring themselves up in response to the signals it has received since you were in your mum.

The illusion of "You" is the song on the radio.

Peace

[Ben D]

Ben D:

Dr Hammeroff makes the mistake of thinking consciousness is a thing.
It is not, it is a process.
If it were a property of quarks or whatever then my sofa (by virtue of mass) must be very conscious.

The action of the omnipresent quantum vacuum on and in the microtubes of the axons of the brain's neurons inducing modifications to the ego consciousness is not a thing but a process, I think you will agree. Moreover he is implying the zero point energy nature of the quantum vacuum is the source of consciousness, ie. proto-consciousness.

No, I don't agree.
What absolute reductionist waffle.

Your brain is like a radio in the sense that it is a device that plays only one song. That song is you.

The song plays on the network of neurons that have been wiring themselves up in response to the signals it has received since you were in your mum.

The illusion of "You" is the song on the radio.

Peace

So let's be clear...are you are implying that the understanding of Dr Hammeroff and Dr Penrose is deluded waffle and without any merit, and that mathematics, ethics, etc., were not abstracted from any source but just spontaneously self created within the brain to be a part of the song that is ego you?

[smoking since 1879]

Why you insist on making assumptions of what i think Ben?

It's clear to me that "mathmatics, ethics, etc" are product of careful thought and reasoning by human beings, whilst you seem to be suggesting that they are like some fruit that is ready to be plucked from a universal tree of knowledge. I'm sorry, but I don;t believe in your god.

Further, If the good professors are correct, how does one explain the deep structuring and differing regions of the brain? If it were just a matter of some quantum process then surely any unstructured lump of neuronal mush would be sufficient?

I read Professor Penrose some time ago, I thought he was wrong then and I still do now. He should stick to his tiles

Peace

[Sounder]

minime wrote….

For instance, duality, as I define it, is essential to existence.

Otherwise, you might as well go walk in front of a train.

It's a question of balance.

It may be the case that reality represents itself dualistically even within a non-dualist model.

To get to the question of balance, take as a working assumption that the level of balance between order and spontaneity is a measure for evolution of consciousness.

It appears with our split model that order and spontaneity come from two different places.

This provides a very unbalanced process for finding balance. As it stands it seems one set of folk find order in the ‘spiritual’, while another set finds the origin of order to be from the physical.

The chosen mode for finding ‘balance’ in this bifurcated world is for the first set to demand ‘freedom’ in the physical and for the second set to demand their ‘freedom’ in the ‘spiritual’.

This situation is bound to produce contrived ‘problems’

Any new system will still have problems, hopefully less contrived.

If balance is a worthy objective, we have a long way to go.

And our current path, while perhaps necessary, is certainly no kind of shortcut.

[minime]

Two and to and too make One.

[minime]

Shoutout to justdrew: Izzi Creo I believe has been my Muse throughout my reading of this thread.

[Hammer of Los]

...
I luv youze guyz.

I ain't no machine messiah.

I'm Mr Natural.

But the net is da second greatest invention evah.

It move faster than wheel.

And fire was not invented, but brought down from the very heavens by Prometheus himself.

The invention of the net was a greater work than that of the printing press, but lesser than that of the written word.

And the materialist orientation is not to be sniffed at.

Here are the three wize monkeyz of materialism;

James Burke
Carl Sagan
David Attenborough

The net is a tool to be picked up and used where appropriate.

Like any totem, strictly speaking it is unnecessary.

But man iz the ultimate tool user.

Like the mood machine.

Man controls the mood machine.

NOT the udder way around.

YOU control YOUR mood machine of pk dick.

Enjoy yerself.

Knock yerself out.

If yer UNlucky.

It'll blow yer sockz off!

XXX.

ps Someone tell Kyle he's crazy. War in heaven is ovah.
...

[Hammer of Los]

...
Am I a real Shaman?

What do you tink?

Bozoz.



XXX.

ps I've just been visited by a fly. I invited him to share my salty nutz. I don't eat mincey meaty.
...

[Ben D]

Why you insist on making assumptions of what i think Ben?

It's clear to me that "mathmatics, ethics, etc" are product of careful thought and reasoning by human beings, whilst you seem to be suggesting that they are like some fruit that is ready to be plucked from a universal tree of knowledge. I'm sorry, but I don;t believe in your god.

Further, If the good professors are correct, how does one explain the deep structuring and differing regions of the brain? If it were just a matter of some quantum process then surely any unstructured lump of neuronal mush would be sufficient?

I read Professor Penrose some time ago, I thought he was wrong then and I still do now. He should stick to his tiles

Peace

I'm not making assumption smoking since 1879, I asking you questions so I can understand your understanding...bear with me please. My responses to your points are in sequence.

Please explain how you know that the principles of logic, ethics, math., etc., are a product of thought processes, thought processes which presumably have none of the aforementioned underlying principles governing them to begin with? Your belief in a dead cosmos, ie. no underlying principles of consciousness, is noted, but hey...reality is not the same as belief, belief is an idea, a faith...the real is forever on the other side of mental constructs which are created in the mind to represent the real symbolically..

But they do my friend, didn't you watch the videos or read Hameroff's stuff? It's not just the brain neurons, the structure in cytoplasm of all cells is organized by networks of microtubules..even plants, moss, bacteria, etc., they are what govern mitosis.

It is noted that you think Professor Penrose is wrong from reading something of him. Fine, good for you, but that's hardly evidence that he is wrong from other people's perspective don't you think?