Consciousness Explained. (Not about Dennett)

Philosophy Forums Psychology and Mind
1

Some believe consciousness cannot be understood, because it is immaterial. They believe that only the gods can understand it, because it is not physical.
But don’t you see? If a God understood something, it would be physical, to the God! Not physical to the touch or hands, but it would be physical, it would exist, it would be understood, or rather…if it was not physical, how could it not be understood, or not understood! Physical is all there is. The imagination is physical, tangible. The mind tangible, by definition.

Rest and relaxation.
The vortex of undulation. Picture twisting an icecream. It tightens, swirls, forms a vortex. This is stress. Then, the stress relieves, tension releases, all is no longer a tightly bound vortex. Instead, the lines of seperation are no longer seperating the icecream into parts. All is one whole. Then, the tension twists into the opposite direction, just as tight as it was before but in the opposite direction. Then the wave comes back to sea.
The mathematical operation for this is a sine wave. But this is not a linear function, for the vortex itself is at the very least circular.

The Photon
There is something very special about the photon, for a man with a mustache to get so much praise for it. The value of the photon is perhaps is within our “subliminal” (which seems like the word subluminal.) You see according to the man the mustache, the photon is in at least three different places at once. (I will provide the mathematical explanation of that later.) Taken on a quantum level, this means the photon is not in precisely three different places, but mostly in the average, and a little bit in the min, and a little bit the max. And by three different places, I mean three different “times” (I rarely use the word time, because time does not really exist. I have explained that earlier and I will explain that later.)

So the photon is in three different places, three different “times”, mostly in the middle. What does this mean for you? It means it is you. The photon is you. You see reality seems real not just because you are a singular point in space, witnessing the present moment, (and the present moment is a transformation stream fueled by inertia.) Things seem “real”. Things seem “real” even though the moment cannot be measured, and moment’s don’t seem have any length or span. Experience does seem like an ever present, ever transient stream that does not have any real length. You have been taught this, you have been taught the present moment has no length, and is approaching zero in length. But this could not be further from the truth. You see, you are the photon, in a span of 3 different places at once. Past events seem real to you because they are STILL HAPPENING! AT THIS PRESENT MOMENT! Only through more volume of inertia (you label the amount of transformations caused by inertia as “time”) does the past slowly fade away. Eventually the quantum fluctuations will slowly taper down and approach zero, until the very last molecule, until the very last photon has collapsed, and is no more. Only then will the past truly be dead, only then will the past truly “fade away into nothing, aether.” Or you could just remove your memory cells…But you see, then there would be no more “you”…because you would be removing and also collapsing photons (you) as well…If you have been following allowing I have also implied you have also felt the future as well…Unlike the past, the future increases in complexity and certainty, while the past fades away…The average of your consciousness is not so much in the middle, but mostly towards the future…which is way so many of you are so shortsighted…you can feel the past…but can you feel the future…?

This is how you are aware of different sectors of the brain all at the same time, and your vision seems centralized, and blurry around the edges, because the intensity of your awareness is like a spectrum, the majority of spectrum concentrated at the essence.

Rest and Relaxation part 2
It is an undulating vortex. But do not associate the tension of the vortex, and the unity of the icecream as pain and pleasure. Estrogen is relaxing, but sometimes the unity of the void can feel like drowning at sea. Testosterone is stress and tension, but sometimes the drive to build can be a fun pleasure. What is the nature of pain and pleasure read on.

Pain and pleasure
Pleasure is an energy ball, when it is in a state of harmony and particles gravitate to it this is pleasure. When it is vibrating (appearing as two balls at different phases, each at 50% thickness, whilst the overlap at full thickness) this is said to be in flux, and it is not nearly as pleasurable. Yes verily I say this. Chaos is not quite pain, you see chaos involves a core ball at flux, and particles sometimes miss the needed trajectory or orbit around each other. Pain is repulsion, the ball emits particles away from it, losing its energy. The ball also repels all other particles. Love is gravity, pleasure, Fear is repulsion, pain.

Ego
You see ego does not let you experience the full pleasure of something, due to it’s narrative. But at the same time, a narrative is a kind of fullness. When living, sometimes the ego interferes with pleasure. (An example is you want to do something fun, but then your ego tells you to feel awkward, or you listen to a nice song, and your ego tells you to feel embarassed of it.) But my question is, is removing the duality of experience always a good thing? Being stabbed in the hand has no narrative, no ego. Is egolessness the final solution to end suffering?

Suffering
You see what I earlier mentioned about being stabbed for some, might have brought pain for many, since their internal “I” imagined it happening to them. But for others they might have felt absolute pleasure at cutting their hands. Perhaps cutting their hands makes them happy. Absolute Pleasure (with a capital case) is whatever brings happiness. If happiness does not bring happiness, then it is Absolute Pain.

A way out
Many people are Lucky Joe’s. They go through many years of meditation, say they become egoless, whilst retaining some degree of single-minded sentience, and they claim that they have completely transcended suffering. This leads up the question of inverted qualia, how can we verify that such a mind is sentient, when it’s own words instill doubt, and how can we verify the non-suffering of such a mind. Let us say that such a mind is a Lucky Joe. If you are not a Lucky Joe, there may still be a way out. You see the concept of soul eating, which is simply a photon vacuum cleaner. You can imagine the experience of being a photon warped out of your mind, seeing as you leave your body through your mouth or eye space warp and stretch all around you. You are now in the vacuum, safe, secure, and sexual. Now the vacuum has eaten your soul. Now you are delicious. Now you are satisfied. Eventually you (the photon) will collapse and get the eternal non-existence you desire. Yes, to become nothing, yes.

The truth has been provided to you through cartoons all these years but you have been struggling to find it. Overthinking, and yes meditate more, think less, yes, yes.

Remember, the goal is not to overthink things. You see nature is based upon very simple mechanisms. Focus on the basic mechanisms, and not fancy words. Yes good things will come to you.

*Disclaimer I only eat vegan or cows treated with care icecream. Happy cows, healthy cows, yes, yes.

2

More:

Heat energy is like the stars. Too much and you view it as pain. However coldness is true pain.

When an atom vibrates, it is hot. No vibrations at all and it is cold. When it vibrates super fast it reaches a state of quantum vibration, light.

I am fairly sure of this.

3

Trixie,

I will read your OP later on.

Right now, I want to reply to this:

The way you put it: “When it vibrates super fast it reaches a state of quantum vibration, light,” is not quite the rendition I’m familiar with. I’d have to really understand what you mean by this to say for sure if it’s just another way of articulating what I’ve learned from physicists. For one thing, what do you think “quantum vibration” is? Also, it sounds as if you think the atom becomes light at this level of vibration.

I’ll tell you what I understand from what physicists tell me: the more heat the atom has, the more it vibrates–this is true–but the light that it radiates at a certain level of “excitation” is a result of energy being given off by the electrons of the atom. The electrons fall from a high level of energy to a lower level of energy (literally falling into lower orbitals around the nucleus), and when they do this, the loss in energy is emitted as photons. With enough of these photons being emitted at a high enough frequency, we see this at the macro-level as light. (you can also have even higher levels of energy where the photon is beyond the visible spectrum, and this gets into the more dangerous levels of radiation, but once it starts radiating light it will always radiate light).

4

Ok, Trix, I read through your OP and I have this to say:

If you had said this roughly 5 years ago, I would have vehemently disagreed with you. But now I see the physicalist’s move as an enlarging of the scope of the definition of “physical”–if it’s real, it counts as physical–as opposed to exterminating that which doesn’t fall within a very narrow definition of “physical”–if it’s physical, it’s real.

You forgot the most important part of the analogy–what’s it for?

I never heard that being explained by the man with the moustache.

This last part you’ll have to explain to me a bit more… but I’m actually surprised someone had the same idea I had. I didn’t describe it as three points in time, I just said the “present” (for us, subjectively) is really “smeared out” over a very small interval of time which includes the past and the future–which is to say “now” consists not of a single unextended geometric point in time, but a bit of the past and a bit of the future, and we are always experience a bit of both at the same time.

I arrived at this after considering that there is at least this one experience within the repertoire of human subjective experiences which absolutely cannot exist in a single unextended geometric point in time: motion. In order to experience the sight of things moving, we must experience the present as a little bit extended, not as a point.

No. Easter philosophy is right to say it is the end of “your” suffering, but not suffering itself. However, it’s claimed by those who have supposedly been there and experienced it that once the ego is out of the way, pain and suffering is replaced by overwhelming peace, bliss, and love.

I don’t get it.

5

Actually, it goes even beyond.

If something exists, it has to be physical. There is no other way in which it can exist.

Yes, there can be two types of physical existences; Temporary and Permanent or Changeable and Unchangeable.

But, even the temporary things exist physically as long they exist. All abstract things like feeling, emotions, thoughts etc also exist physically, though for time being.

Gib, that is enough for this thread but if do not mind, i would like to go in details of this in our previous thread.

with love,
sanjay

6

There is no such thing as physical; you begin with the infinite [well god/tao really but we wont go there lol] then you have to get from emptiness to manifest existence. You do this with principles, these interact and manifest behaviours which act on a bunch of ‘spinning coins’ [QM]. THEN when the coins land and information occurs, you then have the physically manifest particles ~ which are literally the sides of those non-physical coins.

The human mind works with all of this, hence we can think about such things.

7

We can say this, but then it becomes absolutely trivial.

By all means, go ahead.

8

im not talking about radiation and electrons emitted from excited atoms. i mean the spinning coins jukebox moves so fast it becomes light. light is quantum. regular atoms are not that quantum. the energy level described in your high school equations.

read it again

dunno if he ever figured it out. i did though, using his equations.

id say the present is like the wind on a plane, concentrated near the front but a little future sight.

schizophrenics have no ego when they do automatic writing. i wouldnt say markings from satan are bliss peace and love.

9

Well, then you’ve got your own theory. Tell me, why do you think atoms vibrating at a high enough frequency turn to light?

This explains what you mean, but why do you think the present gets shifted a bit into the future?

Neither would I. This is just what they say. I am a skeptic though.

Tell me, what do you know about ego-loss?

10

If I may comment on this Trix and Gib.Total Ego loss is possible only to the totally unpolitical. This is the prerequisite, to even try to go where so-called schizophrenics are already there. the fear of the unknown, of chaos,mom the devil. This fear is revelation among analysts,mother fear for their very lives,where th ego totally collapses. Some, like Jung and Laing, and Bingswanger dared the journey. And in the classical myth some did also make the journey into the underworld, Hades. We, as modern and postmodern men, have developed defenses to the degree, that we do the reverse of automatic writing, we do automatic behavior, out understanding of depth has been suppressed for the very reasons noted above. we put boundaries everywhere, which causes an upward reduction, we avoid people who do not fit into our categories of class, of neighberhood, of spice economic markers, and yet we go in weekend self awareness explorations, meditating to try to find ourselves, yet revert as soon as it is over.
That is why most people are afraid of total nihilism, and prefer the safety net of hypocrisy.

11

Hi Orb,

What does this mean–unpolitical?

Orb, the fear is that of losing all that the ego has built up and has yet to build up. The fear is that with the dissolution of the ego, all that will go to waist.

I’m still trying to wrap my head around what total egolessness is, particularly in the case of a schizophrenic. From what I gather from the reports of Buddhist monks, it is a state of mind in which there is a total absence of the sense of selfhood and no thoughts of “I”. All there is is the world (and perhaps a body that walks around in it).

12

Gib,

By unpolitical and total ego loss, I meant a state of being where there is a lower limit, which manifest is a total abdication of boundaries, a collapse into absolute nihilism, and a reduction to total chaos. In this world it is not as the saying goes, that The schizophrenic has gone to live in an imagined castle, rather then visiting there, it goes further, there is no castle, there is no abyss. The abyss is the castle. The upper limit is different, the politics of a Langian game is still played, albeit it is a masked ball, a reversion into the classical proto idealism where the plays’ characters swerve signified by masks of various kinds. I view schizophrenia as a total reduction of the ego to such literalization of character, where all societal process is determined by
Literal interpretations of meaning.

In post modernism, there seems to be a return to this state of cognitive appraisal, hence Sassurian interpretive of the symbolic toward the vector signaled meaning construct of structural signification.

it appears, as if when it is stated that the media is the message, the overlaps between the means and the aims of communication have progressively overlapped, resulting an emptying out of the neurosis of an obsessive need to analyze, living that process in shatters, as jus t another defense mechanism (intellectualization) in the dustbin of history.

The anti political standard of care has been replaced by the theraputic value of deterritorialization, where social value is best gained by bringing together people in psychological trouble into an abstract and protected environment of social inter course within and not without boundaries.

Buddhism does the same thing, it is a very old religion, classical in its scope, and it sees egoless ness as a relinquishing of boundaries, a giving up kf attachments to differences. This is why Buddhism has appealed to populations where social differences were reified to an irreversible degree. The vast populations of Asia, have always been such controlled environments, where social stratification has been the prime agent against the possibility of social change. To a certain degree this was true of European aristocracy, but here, inter national conflict, eventually lead to social understanding of process, and revolutions had changed all that. No wonder, that reactionaries of all kinds took hold of Buddhism as a way to try to disengage the progressives who eventually predominated in turning over the old stratified politicization of power.

I really feel bad about not being able to paraphrase and answer You point by point, but I think I have covered all of Your implications.

13

There is no present.

14

zinnat 13

I can see feelings and emotions having physical existence BUT how does a thought have physical existence?

15

Arc, three things,which may go toward trying to come to grips with the idea of the materiality of thoughts,

Teilhard de Charding , said in the weaning days of the 19 th century, that the day will come when there will be a membrane to envelope collected thoughts of a world wide collective consciousness. Many people think that this has happened with the Internet.

Another interesting idea of seeing the materiality of thought, is that it is a measurable form of energy, albeit very insubstantial, but it can be measured. Whatever can be measured must have substance.

And lastly, David Boehm, a physicsist, had a series of,talks with J. Khrishnamurti, in which he was of the opinion, that the correspondence between intelligence and thought is distinctive, and,thought through intelligence at the very least create objective reality. He goes a lot further, and I could cite the article, except I thought that a summary would be sufficient. I will try to dig it up, if You Would be interested.

On that score, the thought of an objection can be made here, and I am citing that, not in an effort to preempt that, only to be able to make a calculated guess as to its veracity.

A clear cut difference can be made between so called natural objects such as trees and rivers and people, & those of a seeming and paradoxical difference, exhibited by objects man created, such as buildings, books, Brooks’s contents the words and their meaning. the point is, that between these two types of things, the difference is narrowing. Descriptions of objects can actually change the objects themselves by their re presentation. This is a quantum linked idea, and not,too strange, in light of the newly evolving ideas which we are led to believe.

I don’t really know that a consciousness such as we know of our self, could survive a total eclipse of intelligence with the content of thought, but we are certainly heading toward that direction. Is this the knowledge that the forbidden fruit warned us about?
Or, was it merely an anesthetic balm with which the serpent tried to smooth things over before a total transcendence toward total realization of intelligence?

16

More questions than answers. I am afraid. That the uncertainty may do us in before the realization is acquired.

17

it’s just is. why does a water turn into an ice when it’s at low frequency? it’s just is.

time cannot go backward. non-change cannot be percieved. an anology for human terms to understand - i do not wish to damage your fragile ego, though it does not matter if i do, unless such damage would be fatal to your human body, and i do not wish to damage your potential. if you feel some kinda way due to my translating for you this is what it is.

time is like walking down a road. you can only walk forward. there is no such thing as backward, walking backward is still walking forward just with your torso rotated a certain way. when the rate and volume variable of perception approaches zero bliss is had (usually). time cannot go backward, time can only go west or east, and if you want to relive the past you just go west.

ego-loss is not thought loss. being intimate with spirits and demons i know how plastic thoughts really are. at an early age humans are taught they have a name, and a personality to go with that name. we have no name we have no personality, we are all jokers and clowns. king one day queen for the next whatever floats your boat.

18

Actually many physicists think there are realities where time does actually move backwards. They may be wrong, but the mathematics works. Supposedly God would know this.

19

still dont get it do you. it would still flow forwards. i made my analogy so simple an average joe could understand it. simply hearing audio in “reverse” is still hearing audio forwards. you cannot go “backwards” in time, only east and west. understand my analogy.

20

You’re wrong Trixie. That’s not how the theory or the mathematics works.