• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Demystifying Quantum Physics

godnotgod

Thou art That
You can call it what you want but my point is that it exists. Frequencies and energies exist.

Einstein was one who first started pointing out that matter is interchangeable with energy. That means everything at it's core is energy.

Right, but energy doesn't exist as some-thing; it flows; it is a process, not a thing perse, that 'exists'. There is no such thing as a wave, for example, or a river, or a whirlpool.
 

idav

Being
Premium Member
Right, but energy doesn't exist as some-thing; it flows; it is a process, not a thing perse, that 'exists'. There is no such thing as a wave, for example, or a river, or a whirlpool.

You prefer spirit, non-material. Well 'something' is the only thing I know to talk

Reminds me of that theory that it is the result of a sound and everything is a frequency based off it.
 

godnotgod

Thou art That
You prefer spirit, non-material. Well 'something' is the only thing I know to talk

It's not a question of preferences. I do not prefer 'spirit' over 'material'. Those are simply concepts we superimpose over Reality so that the rational mind can try to 'make sense' of a world it does not really understand. You don't understand it because it understands you!

Could it be that 'something' is the only thing you know to talk because that is what you have been indoctrinated to believe?
 

godnotgod

Thou art That
Quote:
Originally Posted by godnotgod
And yet, you cannot do even a miniscule amount of what gravity can do, but you are intelligent.

What does that have to do with the forces not being intelligent.

As an intelligent being, for you to do what gravity can do would require quite a bit more intelligence than that of gravity, or of that which directs gravity, since, with the intelligence you now possess, you still don't understand how it's done.

Quote:
For that matter, a blade of grass can synthesize its own food without a brain, but you cannot even with a brain, and you are considered intelligent.

You want to compare us to a rock and how intelligent it's gravity is?

But that is already what we do as 'intelligent' beings, do we not? Comparison, in fact, is exactly how we determine that we are intelligent. So if a blade of grass, which has no brain, can synthesize its own food, and you, with a brain, cannot, what does that tell you?

Quote:
Do you deny the universe, which contains and nurtures you, intelligence, while claiming it for yourself?

When did I deny the universe can be intelligent? You start to see intelligence emerge in lifeforms but not so much with inanimate objects. Gravity is a repercussion of matter existing.

And yet, the 'inanimate' can behave as if it does possess intelligence. In fact, not only intelligence, but creativity and orderliness. When you look up into the night sky, the stars seem to be in exactly the right places without appearing deliberately placed, for example. Humans have a tough time attempting that in art, for example. Human 'intelligence' is responsible for much of the disruption of the natural environment, while nature itself seems to 'know' how to behave so that everything is in well-nigh perfect harmony a harmony that repeats itself cyclically.
 
Last edited:

YmirGF

Bodhisattva in Recovery
As an intelligent being, for you to do what gravity can do would require quite a bit more intelligence than that of gravity, or of that which directs gravity, since, with the intelligence you now possess, you still don't understand how it's done.
Respectfully, godnotgod, what the heck is the above supposed to mean? Gravity is "directed"? Says who? And in what sense are you meaning this?

But that is already what we do as 'intelligent' beings, do we not? Comparison, in fact, is exactly how we determine that we are intelligent. So if a blade of grass, which has no brain, can synthesize its own food, and you, with a brain, cannot, what does that tell you?
That intelligence has nothing to do with it?
 

godnotgod

Thou art That
Respectfully, godnotgod, what the heck is the above supposed to mean? Gravity is "directed"? Says who? And in what sense are you meaning this?

Heh..heh..I am merely suggesting this as a possibility, within the context of an intelligent universe, or an intelligent directing force, but not necessarily an anthropomorphic one. I mean this in the sense that the universe is the manifestation of divine, creative play. What suggests this? The universe is comprised of infinite, prolific variety, and for no useful or apparent reason.


That intelligence has nothing to do with it?

Unless we redefine our notion of what intelligence is, which is what idav has suggested. But my question remains: why is it that you, who consider yourself intelligent, deny intelligence to the universe from which you emerged, and which nurtures your intelligence at every turn?

Your comment seems to imply that a brain is required for intelligence to occur. Is that so?
 
Last edited:

Skeptisch

Well-Known Member
Your comment seems to imply that a brain is required for intelligence to occur. Is that so?
In true Choprian fashion you come across as someone who knows what s/he is taking about, but then you go into your gibberish mode and lose all credibility. What exposes Chopra, and people like him, as a charlatans and woo woo masters is the insistence that mental spoon bending is a trivial example of mind and matter as inseparably one and that it can be understood if one understands non locality and non local correlation and the inseparability of mind and matter as different expressions of consciousness.

Like mentioned on this thread before, meaningless babble should not be confused with actually saying something worthwhile.
 

godnotgod

Thou art That
Then you should probably try tranquilizers, because if you don't find some way to calm yourself down, you're going to give yourself a conniption.

I've tried tranquilizers as well, but they just don't seem to have any effect on your ceaseless barking and thrashing about. Maybe a bigger hammer will do the trick.
 

godnotgod

Thou art That
I'm pretty sure your skull is far too thick for any size hammer to make any difference.

Ah, so yours, then, is not! That's wonderful news! It means yours is open enough to new ideas, such as those that Mr. Chopra is presenting. Congratulations! Good to know there are others on this planet, such as yourself, who appreciate the higher realms of thought, and are not bogged down in stuffy old materialist paradigms. :beach:
 

PolyHedral

Superabacus Mystic
Unless we redefine our notion of what intelligence is, which is what idav has suggested. But my question remains: why is it that you, who consider yourself intelligent, deny intelligence to the universe from which you emerged, and which nurtures your intelligence at every turn?
Because I think intelligence is a very well-defined thing that the universe does not have? :shrug:
 

godnotgod

Thou art That
Because I think intelligence is a very well-defined thing that the universe does not have? :shrug:

Isn't it nice to have a brain that is judge, jury, and hangman?

Oh, wait...what's this?...I'm getting a signal from Mr. Universe Itself, and It says:


"Because I think intelligence is a very well-defined thing that certain circular-thinking humans do not have, though they like to think they are the only ones who have it, even though it doesn't really belong to them.":D

But of course the universe is unintelligent, Poly. Why, it's nothing more than a gyrating stupidity, don'cha know?
 
Last edited:

idav

Being
Premium Member
Quote:




As an intelligent being, for you to do what gravity can do would require quite a bit more intelligence than that of gravity, or of that which directs gravity, since, with the intelligence you now possess, you still don't understand how it's done.

But that is already what we do as 'intelligent' beings, do we not? Comparison, in fact, is exactly how we determine that we are intelligent. So if a blade of grass, which has no brain, can synthesize its own food, and you, with a brain, cannot, what does that tell you?


And yet, the 'inanimate' can behave as if it does possess intelligence. In fact, not only intelligence, but creativity and orderliness. When you look up into the night sky, the stars seem to be in exactly the right places without appearing deliberately placed, for example. Humans have a tough time attempting that in art, for example. Human 'intelligence' is responsible for much of the disruption of the natural environment, while nature itself seems to 'know' how to behave so that everything is in well-nigh perfect harmony a harmony that repeats itself cyclically.

A blade of grass can learn to limited extent so if there is intelligence there it is very limited. What about degrees of intelligence, some animals display very good creativity and a few actually make tools. We can be taught but being able to come up with it is what makes something intelligent genius.

So gravity kills but not with intention. I dont see rocks rolling and falling intelligently.

You keep we cant do what gravity does cant do photosynthesis but it doesnt utilize intelligence. Computers show more intelligence than your examples, computers can do things not normally found in nature.
 
Top