@Omnedon I feel that the concept of existence is based on a superficial space/time/matter model of reality, a model needed for bodily survival but useless for understanding the foundation of reality.

@Omnedon Matter exists in our illusory reality of the senses, but examined more closely it is seen to be, not a thing but an interaction between covariant quantum fields.

Do waterfalls exist? Sure, we define certain recurring sensory patterns to be “things”, as in data compression. But what is a waterfall? It’s not the water—if it were the water every minute a new waterfall would be created. Topography with moving water? Look at the stream bed.and you’ll see that it is constantly wearing away. Waterfalls exist in our imagination.

The stuff of the world is mind stuff.

Sir Arthur Eddington:

“The universe is of the nature of a thought or sensation in a universal Mind... To put the conclusion crudely — the stuff of the world is mind-stuff.

“We are no longer tempted to condemn the spiritual aspects of our nature as illusory because of their lack of concreteness.

“The scientific answer is relevant so far as concerns the sense-impressions... For the rest the human spirit must turn to the unseen world to which it itself belongs.“

@Omnedon That is only your opinion, one that I can not accept. Can you explain how conscious awareness can arise from the firing of neurons? Makes no sense to me.

@Omnedon Yes, and also my iPhone is involved in consciousness except when I turn it off.

@Omnedon Humans are only a part of the continuum of life. Life sprang from some sort of foundational basis, one that we can not understand or know on the sense level. Current human organic bodies cannot begin to explain the underpinnings of reality. To say that everything fell into existence on accident—that is a non-answer as useless as to say that God did it.

@Omnedon When I press a key, first there was intention—conscious awareness. The Apple programmers who set up the system were consciously aware, as were the creators of my apps.

I suspect that conscious awareness controls the brain part of the time. Our bodies are also on autopilot for most functions.

Assuming this is all true, and it may well be for all I know, is there some practical use for it, other than the general satisfaction of knowing?

@skado I would think that for normal day to day life that kind of awareness wouldn’t help you survive. Some individuals might experience a sense of joy or ecstasy along with motivation to live long and well.

I lean toward thinking that the idea is true, but even if it’s not there’s fun in thinking about it—like watching a TV drama or something.

@WilliamFleming Firstly William, and medically speaking here, you HAVE to be awake first to have any sign of detectable consciousness, ergo your conscious brain must be active.
There two distinct sectors of the brain/mind in human, the Conscious brain/mind and the Sub-Conscious brain/mind.
While the Conscious brain/mind is alert and active the Sub-Conscious brain is semi-dormant and vice versa.
During sleep phases the Conscious switches off and the Sub-Conscious 'downloads, sorts through and corellates what the Conscious has learned, interpreted, observed, etc, etc, during its active period.
Then we have the Autonomic Nervous system controlled mainly by an entirely different section of the brian/mind, this is somewhat akin to an operations programme of a Master Computer system, it runs independenttly 24/7 365 days a year for your entire life sending signals to your heart lungs, endocrine systems, etc, etc, telling them what do, how to do it and when to do it, etc, etc, that is UNLESS a 'glitch' such as an embolism, Brain Haemorrage, severe Head Injury or Cerebro-vascular accident, etc, occurrs in the region of Autonomic Nervous system/brain/mind then shit truly does often hit fan, so to speak.
But since, as both you and JeffMesser seem to want to have us believe, we are Non-corporeal, Non-material ( i.e. being made up of matter) then such things cannot exist therefore Medicine, Medical Sciences, etc, etc, are guilty of suppositions in extremis are they not?
Ergo, should you or Jeff suddenly develop symptoms of a Brain Haemorrhage, C.V.A. or the like, though I would most sincerely and emphatically NOT recommend doing so, you could both just put such 'symptoms' down as being minor error in the algorithms controlling your 'awareness' programmes.

@Triphid it’s not that we individually are non-corporeal. As individuals with organic bodies, I am in full agreement with what you are saying. What you are missing is that organic bodies have no awareness of self, or free will. How could the firing of neurons possibly cause self-awareness? No one has ever explained how such a thing could occur, and many leading scientists have concluded that it does NOT occur.

Sure, pull the plug on a computer and it goes dead. But your computer never had conscious awareness to begin with—it was not a self. From an overall perspective the death of a computer is of little significance—other computers are in operation. Correlate that with organic bodies.

You are clinging to a materialistic, corporeal world view, but there is not a shred of scientific evidence in support of such a view. What is ethereal is the mislabeled “concrete“ world of our senses, which is purely symbolic and imaginary, and is nothing like ultimate reality beyond. This is not some sort of woo—it should be plain as day to everyone. The idea has been a part of the body of science for a very long time. According to quantum gravity theory particles of matter are not things but events. That kicks materialism in the head right there. There are no things in the universe.

So-called “things” are nothing but recurring patterns of sensory input. For efficiency we think of those patterns as
discreet objects, and sometimes assign them names. It is data compression.

@WilliamFleming So, going by what I assume you've just said, then your profile, your profile photo, your comments on the site and groups, etc, are absolutely nothing more than NOTHING and as we so often informed by the Religious " Nothing can come from Nothing."
So, enlighten me please, since you are, as you appear to imply, a non-corproreal entity, just a mere shell transporting around an awareness, then where exactly did,
A) this 'shell' come from, if at all you are just a mere shell that is,
B) Where and from whence did this non-corporeal 'awareness' come into being and by what means,
C) How, exactly can this 'awareness' claim to have had ACTUAL 'parents,'
D) what source/s of energy power/drive/energize this non-corporeal 'awareness' during its non-corporeal existence, and last but by no means least,
E) what happens to this 'awareness' when it no longer operates. i.e. dies?
As to you anaolgy of a computer verus a human brain and body, well my example was merely in simple terms that the mind, brain, central nervous system and autonomic nervous system are somewhat AKIN to a computer BUT the difference ids that a computer requires an EXTERNAL power source to operate efficiently whereas the REALITY of the human body creates its own electrical energy, an energy which has been PROVEN time and time again to EXIST.
Albeit that that electrical energy is a very very low voltage, amperage, etc, but it does exist none-the -less.
As the brain grows, develops and learns it creates new neural pathways ( tracks similar to the circuits on a circuit board if you will) between neurons and axions, etc, alomg which these micro-electric pulses can travel thus increasing the memory capacity and abilities of the brain.
But, unlike the computers we create our brains, well for most of us that is, do not have a limited memory capacity whereas computers have a limited memory capacity.
Yet we too have both a R.O.M. system within our brains/minds as well as R.A.M. system just as does your computer, lap-top, iphone, ipad, etc, etc, our R.O.M system is what I'd loosely label as being the Autonomic/Central Nervous System of the brain/mind, our R.A.M. system is the major part of our mind/brain and it learns, write and re-writes its 'circuits' on a basis of possibly and probably every second or minute as we learn, realize or comprehend something new ech and every time/hour,day, etc, we are awake and aware.
For example, a new born child has no ambulatory abilities at birth, but as time and experiences go by it observes, learns and the 'circuits' in the brain/mind are formed slowly and steadily then, voila, the 'circiuts' are complete, the new neurons and axions can now receive the necessary micro-electirical impulse and the child begins to learn to stand, place one foot in front of the other and walkinf commences.
And all this occurs BECAUSE the boy and the brain have a material, phsyical, corporeal form, shape and the musculature to enable it to do so.
Ergo, IF we were only a non-corporeal 'awareness' we would neither need a a physical 'transportation system, i.e. a frail body with a limited existence time spans, to 'travel' around in, nor would we required such inventions as telephones, computers, the internet, books, cars, buses, trains, etc, etc, because this 'awaeness' would have the inherent abilities to travel anywhere, anytime at will and would not be so tied down as you and I are.
Is that not simple logic to you?

@Triphid You are interpreting it all wrongly, and you are thinking in terms of the space/time/matter model that is nothing but imagination. As long as you cling to that model we won’t be able to communicate. You want to know where things “come from”, but since, from a higher perspective time does not exist, the concept of “coming from” is meaningless. Organic bodies are extensions of universal consciousness. You seem to be thinking about some sort of individual soul, and that is not at all what I am trying to convey.

As an analogy think of a fleet of self-driving cars. A self-driving car has no soul, no self-awareness, no free will. It is not a self but an assemblage of parts. When it is taken out of service it is nothing but junk.

Most of the time a self-driving car appears to be conscious. It can talk, plan its own route, react to new situations, etc. But its functioning depends on programming, logic, memory, and sometimes random choices. It might operate alone for a long time, but periodically its computer is over-ridden by a conscious entity from a realm outside its personal reality.

I certainly can not explain this concept fully—there are lots of gaps and I’m not sure of it all. I am basically mystified and bewildered by reality and feel profound awe and reverence.

Sounds as though you understand reality fully and your mind is fully made up. If by any chance you want to learn more about universal consciousness you can glean sources from my quote above from HuffPost. For a very good scientific exposition of reality beyond the senses read Reality is not What it Seems by Carlo Rovelli.

I see no reason to carry this further. Thanks for a stimulating interchange.

@WilliamFleming Again with the circular type of reasoning you so adroitly employ.

rules man rules

@JeffMesser So if I disobey these so-called 'rules' as you imply, then I can walkj through walls, etc, etc, and not even feel anything or even get a mere scratch, is that correct?

@Triphid in this body as part of the interactive world we are subject to them. or this body is at least. but we're not this body. we are the awareness wearing this body as a suit. we are infinite, bliss, and pure knowledge.

@JeffMesser FYI, the ONLY way this 'awareness' of which speak can escape from the bag of bones, water, etc, etc, in which it survives is by the death and decomposition of that self-same carcass.
And, both medically and scientifically speaking, once the carcass dies and decays so does this 'awareness' as well.

Or is that simple explanation just a wee bit beyond your comprehension perhaps?

@Triphid I already accepted your no response the first time. please feel free to move on. you obviously have another path to follow.

@JeffMesser Why should it be the one who 'moves on'?
Does my knowledge put so much dread and fear into you?
IF you can't handle others disputing/disagreeing with you opinions then perhaps you should consider 'moving on' to fields where you 'ideas'would gain acceptance.
I'd humbly suggest you try such other sites as those that follow the 'Flat Earth Ideology for example, they would most likely greet you with open arms imho.

@Triphid head to melbourne and talk to sailor bob. he's 91 so you might wanna hurry.

@JeffMesser Not a snowball's chance in a bushfire, I'm having way too much enjoyment here.

@Triphid well, it's a good 9 hrs. but it would be worth your time.

@JeffMesser Rules Jeff Messer, Rules, since as you say there is NO Matter then ergo time also does not exist, is that not so?
Since, logically, without matter there is no time to measured and vice versa, without time then there can be no Matter.

@Triphid go talk to sailor bob adamson.

@JeffMesser No, as I said I'm having far more fun here with you PLUS can you prove that this 'Sailor Bob' actually exists or is he yet another of these rules you keep talking about?

I will interpret that as a no.

I’m around here so much ..I’ll occasionally award ‘the best laugh of the day’ - you win

nope. just truth.

@JeffMesser My comment was only partly in jest. I did a lot of psychedelics in my day. I would never recommend them to anyone, but I'm very glad I had those experiences. Your post sounds just like a post-trip monologue to me. It's fun and sometimes interesting to discuss the nature of reality, but doing so rarely results in any useful new perspectives. In the end you still have to deal with the hard realities of living on this planet in a human society.

Are you sure? Maybe someone slipped you a little Molly or something...

you get to push the roller coaster to and fro during the trip.

@JeffMesser That means somewhere there is a ‘choice’ that can be made which is outside the confines of the model

@Geoffrey51 nope it doesn't. if you imagine the parameters of any limits then you're still thinking in 3 dimensions.

@JeffMesser So there is a mind outside of the 3D world that sets the agenda?

@Geoffrey51 no, there is no world. there is consciousness and rules.

@JeffMesser Do the rules are the confines

@Geoffrey51 sure, they can be. physical limitations imposed during the events' lifetime. every happening is its' own universe subject to its' own rules. we seem similar patterns in many of them but it's all the same.

and what evidence would make you convinced?

@JeffMesser The burden of proof is yours. What have you got?

@BestWithoutGods old books, current physics, and a discrepancy in the speed of light measurements. nut what do you have saying I am wrong?

@JeffMesser Doesn't current physics demonstrate that matter exists? Where do you get the "physics" that tells you matter is a mental construct?

@BestWithoutGods what is it made of?

@JeffMesser Sub-atomic particles form atoms. Atoms form elements and molecules. Elements and molecules form all the physical things we can observe, including our own bodies. Without matter we would have no bodies, no nature, no planets no stars. We would have nothing. Even we, ourselves, would not exist.

@BestWithoutGods come now best. you and @Bobby9 and @omnedon should be able to answer, right? what is matter made of since you declare I am not correct? Subatomic particles? what are those made of??

@JeffMesser I am not "declaring" that you are wrong. I am questioning whether it is possible that you are right. What do you think matter is made of? You seem to think that it is only imaginary. In that case, why do you bring "physics" into it? Physics says that matter and energy exist, and does a great job demonstrating that it does. Where is the flaw in physics? Can you demonstrate an ability to make things appear and disappear with only mental exercises?

@BestWithoutGods what is matter made of? what is the basic building block of matter?

@JeffMesser Sub-atomic particles. But, look, you have made some pretty wild claims, and you seem to refuse to back them up. What are your claims made of? I suspect that you have been duped by some cult. Prove me wrong, if you can.

@BestWithoutGods and what are those subatomic particles made of?

@JeffMesser [en.wikipedia.org]

@BestWithoutGods oh no you don't. I don't have to read an article. I was a nuclear engineer for the better part of 10 years. what are those made of?

@Omnedon this is exactly why the internet produces so many dunning-krueger candidates. you guys learn just enough about a subject to think you know what you're talking about. it goes back to a matter of epistemology. do you think we can actually photograph subatomic particles? can we grab onto one and hold it and feel it? do you even have any idea how those electron microscopes work? they measure an EVENT and place its' probability within a field of potential locations. They do this by firing electrons and measuring potential on the other side then using a computer to compare a gazillion readings. They don't grab one and say "look, got it in my hand". It's an EVENT. The result of RULES. Come back when you actually have some logical complaint. You don't even know what you do have. STart off by asking yourself "What am I?" answer that and you'll be on track.

@Omnedon answer what you are and we will have the starting point necessary. right now you're still on the physical realm. as long as you're there then the same question will be asked.

@JeffMesser Omnedon is right.

You brought up the topic. I asked for evidence. You seem to be avoiding supplying evidence by trying to put the burden of proof on everyone else. It is your hypothesis. You supply the evidence. Take your time. It may take you a day or several days, or weeks or months. But please back up your assertions. Otherwise, your hypothesis remains just a hypothesis, with no evidence to back it up. I'll wait patiently for your evidence. I will not be so patient if you keep avoiding your responsibility.

@Omnedon But what really is “existence”? It’s a big mystery.

@BestWithoutGods do you understand epistemology? either of you?? how do you prove something that cannot be perceived? you get evidence of effects that tend to substantiate. you guys really should learn about the nature of testing and evidence before making such generic arguments. I have told you there is no such thing as matter. How do you prove the negative? there is NO proof of an elementary particle. "evidence of effects that tend to substantiate". thats not the proof you think. mainly because there's no such thing as matter. it's all events happening in awareness. now that we all have an overview please tell me what matter is made of? or tell me what you are? either of those questions will be the sufficient beginning because they are both the same answer.

@JeffMesser [en.wikipedia.org]

@JeffMesser I'm waiting for you to provide evidence for your hypothesis. Until that happens, I am convinced that there IS matter, time, space and a universe. At present, I think that you are denying reality. Prove me wrong. I will carefully consider your evidence, when (or if) you provide it.

@Omnedon Another option is that everyone does “exist” but that we are all a single aware entity.

As an analogy think of that mental condition previously known as multiple personality disorder. Various selves live together, claiming a single body. There is no reason to think that only one of them is any more legitimate than another. They are all illusions.

@WilliamFleming Your hypothesis sounds unscientific and bizarre to me. As I said to JeffMesser, until I see evidence supporting your hypothesis, I'm not going to believe it. I go with science, not superstition.

@BestWithoutGods do you understand science? what is a meter deflection? do you understand how we measure things in science? do you understand the difference between direct and indirect proof? what do you even think proof is? you don't even know what you don't know. so please start off by addressing the question - what are you?

@BestWithoutGods If you are going to go with science, embrace science all the way. The spirit of science is to question, to speculate, to hypothesize.

No one is asking you to believe anything. Belief is a trivial emotion of little value.

So far as the idea of universal consciousness being superstition, I think otherwise. Many of the greatest physicists of history have advocated for the idea.

“Lest the idea of a unitary, group, or universal mind be dismissed as new-age woo-woo, we should note that some of the most distinguished scientists of the 20th century have endorsed this perspective. The renowned physicist David Bohm said, "Each person enfolds something of the spirit of the other in his consciousness. Deep down the consciousness of mankind is one. This is a virtual certainty... and if we don't see this it's because we are blinding ourselves to it." Anthropologist and psychologist Gregory Bateson: "The individual mind is immanent but not only in the body. It is immanent also in the pathways and messages outside the body; and there is a larger Mind of which the individual mind is only a sub-system..." Physicist Henry Margenau: "There is a physical reality that is in essence the same for all... [This] oneness of the all implies the universality of mind... If my conclusions are correct, each individual is part of God or part of the Universal Mind." Nobel physicist Erwin Schrodinger also believed that minds are united and one. He said, "To divide or multiply consciousness is something meaningless. There is obviously only one alternative, namely the unification of minds or consciousness... [I]n truth there is only one mind." [huffpost.com]

@JeffMesser What am I? I am an animal of the human kind. So are you.

@WilliamFleming And what evidence do scientists have to back up that hypothesis?

@BestWithoutGods Read it from them if you are truly interested. They have compelling reasons for their ideas but you have to study the subject. Sitting back and demanding evidence will get you nowhere.

@BestWithoutGods you're an animal? so are you less of an animal if I cut off your arm?

@JeffMesser Of course, I'm an animal. So are you. Humans are part of the animal kingdom. And don't cut off my arm!

@BestWithoutGods please answer the question.

@JeffMesser If you cut off my arm, I would be a handicapped animal.

@BestWithoutGods so how much would I need to cut off for you not to be an animal?

@JeffMesser You'd have to kill me. Then I would just be a corpse.

@BestWithoutGods how do you know corpses aren't aware?

@JeffMesser Funny!

@JeffMesser Seriously now: Corpses are not aware because they're DEAD.

@BestWithoutGods where's your proof?

@JeffMesser A dead body has no more sensation. No sight, hearing, feeling, taste, smell. The brain does not work anymore. It's dead. That's what dead means. It's not a coma, it's death. Do you have proof otherwise? Have you ever seen a dead body sit up and say, "Ow, that hurts?" LOL.

@BestWithoutGods that's your proof?? as if you'd accept that from me LOL. you can do better than that can't you?

@JeffMesser WOW, a Nuclear Physicist for 10 years you claim, then you'd know the full meaning, etc, of Albert Einstein's E=MC squared and to what precisely it refers.
So please, feel most free to explain it in full to us all.

you're too wrapped up and conditioned by the physical world. you need to figure out what you are first. you still think you're of this body. as long as you keep that illusion going you will never find the truth.

@JeffMesser For Avicenna, truth is "what corresponds in the mind to what is outside it". I agree.

@Paul4747 no, I'm saying you're still operating under the delusion that you are your body. figure out what you are and the answers will clarify.

@JeffMesser Yes, I know exactly what you're saying. And if consciousness does not originate from the electrical, biological and chemical reactions of the brain, it doesn't originate from anything. Mind and body are intimately connected, and one can't exist without the other. You seem to be under a delusion that you are other than your body.
If you aren't your body, what are you? In this whole thread, you haven't given anyone an actual, non-vague-mystical-BS answer to the question of what your supposed "truth" is.

show you? ok. no. you'd have to do that for yourself.

@SanDiegoAirport not if you realize the implications.

@JeffMesser But, I don't buy into this. If a claim is made about something I want to see something that will back it up; and here, there is nothing to back anything up. There is only some vague idea that you can just make up whatever you want.

I merely asked if you wish to know. if you don't you are welcomed to get lost.

@Bobby9 you've registered your no vote a few times. now get lost.

never said these bodies werent subject to those interactions. but it won't do anything to you.

and I detest people who say woo out of ignorance. I will mark this as a "no".

@JeffMesser Like I give a fuck what you think. Woo is woo no matter how you dress it up. GEEZ!

@Sticks48 so "no" aye.

@JeffMesser Have you ever thought that perhaps your ignorance of actual facts and reality is what causes you to spout forth this woo-woo?

a firm no. thats just fine.

I asked if you wished to understand it. It appears your answer is no. thats cool. you're going to the same path whether you go willingly or you get dragged there screaming and kicking. your demeanor along the way is certainly up to you. namaste

in reality nothing. but in this universe I create it's all very physically real if it's in those rules.

hmmm ... let's see. the speed of light being a constant no matter what velocity the observer is already traveling at.

@JeffMesser Sure thing, bub.

@BryanLV look it up man.

@JeffMesser I already knew that, but that is not without debate, first.

Second, you made far more claims than that.

@BryanLV it's all a corollary.

@JeffMesser So that means the speed of light is a barrier restricting development apart from within its confines.

@Geoffrey51 it's a physical rule in the physical "world". a rule made necessary because of our limits. as awareness we aren't subject to it because we have no mass. just like light. but when you add in a physical world caused by cause and effect then it's a limitation.

@JeffMesser I understand what you are saying, I.e there is more space than matter at a sub atomic level and the thought process manipulates the matter at that level, but it’s not too helpful for most folks in a day context.

Examples of the effect in the 3D world, where most people exist would be helpful.

@Geoffrey51 it's just a ride. no worries. enjoy it.

@JeffMesser That’s even more vague than “God moves in mysterious ways”

@Geoffrey51 it (life) is just a ride. no worries. enjoy it. I thought it was rather clear and concise. I was actually rather proud of it.

OK, I will accept that. I just want to make sure people see another view. namaste.

if you believe me ignorant then please enlighten me as to what you know that I do not. I mean, surely you wouldnt call me ignorant without actually knowing what the word means?

I agree with your diagnosis 100%.

@JeffMesser For starters, I know the difference between arrogance and ignorance.

@PBuck0145 you guys are all like a bunch of english clerics in the 1300's doing spit-takes as I suggest some sort of heresy. seekers of truth my ass. bunch of turtles.

I will take that as a no.