PDA

View Full Version : What if we're holograms?



ButterflyWoman
31st May 2010, 08:39 AM
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/art ... wD9G0L6587 (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gkJ2w3ihVuGevuUO4Mg5LyBm975wD9G0L6587)

Ouroboros
31st May 2010, 12:13 PM
At the end of the article - "Consciousness is nothing but the physical processes taking place in the brain. ... Consciousness is just another interaction of particles."

Hehe...wasn't aware that science had proved this already! I wonder if he can point me to the study that put that question to rest... :P

As far as the hologram part...nice to see that Science is finally catching up to what a lot of metaphysical traditions had already discovered. Bravo, folks. *golf clap*

Tutor
31st May 2010, 03:52 PM
what if we are 'that' which from, a hologrammed self would provide our being?

there is a world of difference between scientifically proving one's insignificance and that insignificance proved as humility.

for one says we are not but an accident, and that is quite releiving considering our denied destructive inclinations. the other would from accepting our destructiveness find itself moved to be humbled in a light that preceded any hologram that might with science seek greater disguise from truth.

tim

ButterflyWoman
31st May 2010, 04:06 PM
wasn't aware that science had proved this already! I wonder if he can point me to the study that put that question to rest...
Yeah, I noticed that, too. I think they're using the word "consciousness" in a different way than you or I might use it, but still. Fact is, science has no clue what consciousness is, nor do they really understand how memory works (though they think it's probably - wait for it - holographic).


nice to see that Science is finally catching up to what a lot of metaphysical traditions had already discovered. Bravo, folks. *golf clap*
That's why I posted it. I was amused to see how science can explain everything. Unfortunately for science, the Buddha (and others) was there waiting for them. ;)

CFTraveler
31st May 2010, 04:13 PM
Let's just for fun presume that the universe is a hologram.
I am always amused at the interpretations that come from these types of hypotheses- it is the modern equivalent to the watchmaker hypothesis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watchmaker_analogy), IMO.
The thing is that just like the concept of time precedes the making of a clock, so does the holographic reality of the universe (if the way I write it alarms you, please see my first statement) precede our ability to create a hologram projector.
Just because we can make lightbulbs doesn't mean that the sun had to be a lightbulb made by a manufacturer, and just as the universe is a hologram doesn't mean it had to be constructed mechanically by some sort of discreet 'higher' intelligence. It could have been, but it's not a foregone conclusion.
:lol:

ButterflyWoman
31st May 2010, 04:16 PM
Well, as I understand it, the "hologram" thing is just a model, a metaphor. It's a better metaphor than a clock, anyway. (I never did really get that one.)

I actually think Plato's Cave stands the test of time, though, I quite like the modern equivalent of making the cave into a movie theatre. Lots of good metaphorical value, there. ;)

CFTraveler
31st May 2010, 04:18 PM
I agree. This just means the universe is so much cooler and more mysterious that we think it is.

ButterflyWoman
31st May 2010, 04:31 PM
This just means the universe is so much cooler and more mysterious that we think it is. 8)

Tutor
31st May 2010, 05:01 PM
just for fun let's imagine that that is what i agreed with. the self, the universe is an hologram, but let's not make it the scapegoat is all i was also saying. let's not crucify the flesh to escape the response-able being within.

let's allow our words to reflect parity with our flesh.

isnt that indication of true fun, that fun of an innocent child playing with the 'what is' in and of their own sentient imaginations.

dont y'all tire of scientifically dissecting the 'what is' as if it isnt yours from your self, where that you without it couldnt even be imaginatively pondering with awe struct eyes to see it as it is/as you are?

it is not a 'what if', it is you the 'what is' because of you seeing/feeling it so to be.

garsh, i am not a wet blanket, but instead try to pull the blanket's off.

but if fun is pretending that it isnt us, i guess i can play that too. :|

CFTraveler
31st May 2010, 10:09 PM
You know, it depends on the day.

wstein
1st June 2010, 12:18 AM
Also at http://quantumphysics.tribe.net/thread/7c1b85e4-b6f8-4d41-9a51-d236144e27aa

It means that a bit of everything is everywhere. It makes the "spooky action at a distance" thing a lot less mysterious.

Now if I could just find a way to stop thinking that I am only in one place...

Neil Templar
1st June 2010, 12:49 AM
i was thinking earlier, that it doesn't really matter if science proves the hologram theory.
that folk will still need to get to grips with consciousness if they want to experience all that reality is.
but of course that's wrong. if science does prove it, then the belief system undergoes a radical change, and an unstoppable shift in consciousness will occur. if the population of the world suddenly "knows" that the physical is an illusion/hologram, their perspective will shift automatically, right?

CFTraveler
1st June 2010, 02:47 AM
That's what some worldviews postulate, yes.

Tutor
1st June 2010, 03:10 AM
hey folks,

sorry if i made an arse of myself. :oops:

ego...what ya gonna do? :roll:

tim

ButterflyWoman
1st June 2010, 06:19 AM
sorry if i made an arse of myself. :oops:
I didn't think you had. ;)