I challenge you: your best alternate to materialism

[abaddon]

Wrong, both subjective and objective evidences are variant by nature.

Please show me even a single objective evident that is absolutely invariant.

No problem. If you truly believe that nonsense, you would have no problem being filmed walking off the top of the nearest building, since you will not fall.

You will not do this since, in reality, you know that were you to undertake such an action, you would fall to your unpleasant, splattery death on whichever surface was below.

So what evidence do we have? Leaping out of tall structures due to whatever results in invariant serious injury and death. It most certainly does not result in levitating people.

Sad as the reality of suicide is, one must acknowledge the actual intention.

Now, some have done so out of disorder. Some have done it out of despair. Some have done it out of voices in their head and so on. But there is not a single suicide candidate who has floated. I wonder why?

 

[ctamblyn]

Please look at http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=10417706&postcount=936 , in order to understand better my UFT view.

Thanks, but I already understand it well enough.

 

[doronshadmi]

No problem. If you truly believe that nonsense, you would have no problem being filmed walking off the top of the nearest building, since you will not fall.

I do not have to fall since I use, for example, rappelling equipment, so what is your point?

 

[doronshadmi]

Thanks, but I already understand it well enough.

Does it includes my novel view of set theory?

If so, then please air your view about it.

Thank you.

 

[ctamblyn]

Yes, and I have already commented on it.

 

[abaddon]

No, only space\time variant questions.

Translation:

I don't have to answer the questions I dislike, or any which challenge my contention

Nope. That isn't how science works, nor skeptcism, nor rational thought, nor mysticism, nor para-anything nor anything really.

You, and you alone, are making claims about TM^TM.

Your claim, your burden of proof.

 

[abaddon]

I do not have to fall since I use, for example, rappelling equipment, so what is your point?

No such equipment was even vaguely suggested. You, and you alone threw that non sequitur into the mix. It was you and you alone who subverted your own argument.

It is you and you alone who is now claiming that TM^TM could not possibly save you in such a circumstance without you deferring to technological assistance.

You have now admitted that your TM^TM would be utterly useless and that you would immediately revert to the the material world, which we know exists, instead of the TM^TM world. Why?

 

[Belz...]

Wrong, both subjective and objective evidences are variant by nature.

That is meaningless in the context of this discussion. You are just throwing words randomly.

Please show me even a single objective evident that is absolutely invariant.

That's easy: light travels at 300,000 km per second.

 

[Belz...]

Does it includes my novel view of set theory?

Your novel view of set theory is that the borders of the circles are somehow meaningful.

 

[doronshadmi]

That is meaningless in the context of this discussion. You are just throwing words randomly.

No dear Belz..., talking, writhing, drawing, thinking are all variant expressions about the invariant substance of existence, and one actually aware of it only if he\she transcends all variant expressions of it.

Objective experience is any data that was collected by many independent tools that were built by us (so after all they are agents of ourselves) in order to provide the same results from all the, so called, independent external tools, and these results are analyzed by methods that are based on wide agreement among persons that together developed them along the years by theory and experiments.

In the bottom line, both theory and experiments results (including the tools that were built in order provide results) are all derived from our brain's abstract and non-abstract abilities.

Subjective experience is any data that can be found in one's brain which is not necessarily found also as an external phenomena out of one's brain.

But, as we have just seen, also, so called, external phenomena out of one's brain, can't be known without the existence of brains.

Inside_brains or outside_brains do not exclude the brain as a significant factor, whether things are understood as objective or subjective.

So the common factor for both objectivity and subjectivity is our brain, and without really know and develop this common factor we can't really know the objective or subjective and their relations with each other.

Techniques like Transcendental Meditation are tuned to use the brain in order to directly be aware of the simplest state of existence, where the simplest state of existence is the substance of both objective and subjective experiences, and being their substance means that is not bounded by any one of them or by both of them.

Techniques like Transcendental Meditation do not care about the meaning of thoughts, all they care is about the natural ability of the brain to be aware of finer activity of its thoughts process, until one is directly aware of the substance of all possible activities, which is awareness without thoughts that is naturally invariant exactly as the simplest state of existence is simply being without any objective or subjective (which are naturally variant phenomena).

Since the invariant simplest state of existence is the common substance of both objective and subjective variant phenomena, a given brain that is tuned to act right from the simplest state of existence, naturally becomes an harmonious factor among objective and subjective (which are naturally variant phenomena).

That's easy: light travels at 300,000 km per second.

No, it has different speeds when travels through vacuum, gas, liquid or solid, and it is also influenced by space\time curvature.

Furthermore, in terms of mutiverse, the speed of light can be different in another universe, and physical scientists definitely do not reject the research of the existence of mutiverse, where our universe is no more than some case out of finitely\infinitely many cases of it.

 

[ehcks]

No, it has different speeds when travels through vacuum, gas, liquid or solid, and it is also influenced by space\time curvature.

A photon only travels at 300,000 km/s. It never travels at any other speed. It never slows, it never speeds up, and it only "stops" by temporarily ceasing to exist.

 

[doronshadmi]

Your novel view of set theory is that the borders of the circles are somehow meaningful.

No, my novel view of set theory is that the non-composed is not one of the members of its composed expressions.

 

[doronshadmi]

A photon only travels at 300,000 km/s. It never travels at any other speed. It never slows, it never speeds up, and it only "stops" by temporarily ceasing to exist.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_light#In_a_medium

http://micro.magnet.fsu.edu/primer/java/speedoflight/

 

[Belz...]

No dear Belz..., talking, writhing, drawing, thinking are all variant expressions about the invariant substance of existence, and one actually aware of it only if he\she transcends all variant expressions of it.

Your response to me telling you that you are throwing random words around is to keep doing it ?

Objective experience is any data that was collected by many independent tools that were built by us (so after all they are agents of ourselves) in order to provide the same results from all the, so called, independent external tools, and these results are analyzed by methods that are based on wide agreement among persons that together developed them along the years by theory and experiments.

I told you: objective evidence is evidence that doesn't change (is invariant) depending on the observer. For instance, a colour-blind person can still see using instruments that something reflects light at a certain frequency.

Subjective experience is any data that can be found in one's brain which is not necessarily found also as an external phenomena out of one's brain.

In other words, the evidence you suggest for neutral monism is subjective, and therefore worthless. It's "trust your feelings".

Techniques like Transcendental Meditation are tuned to use the brain in order to directly be aware of the simplest state of existence

How does that work ?

Since the invariant simplest state of existence is the common substance of both objective and subjective variant phenomena, a given brain that is tuned to act right from the simplest state of existence, naturally becomes an harmonious factor among objective and subjective (which are naturally variant phenomena).

You say this as though it explained something. It doesn't. It's new-age rhetoric, nothing more.

No, it has different speeds when travels through vacuum, gas, liquid or solid, and it is also influenced by space\time curvature.

Doron, please stop embarrassing yourself. A photon ALWAYS travels at c. In various substances the photon get absorbed (destroyed), and a new one emitted (created). But the photons themselves always have the same speed.

Furthermore, in terms of mutiverse, the speed of light can be different in another universe

Who the hell cares about fictional worlds you imagine ?

 

[Belz...]

No, my novel view of set theory is that the non-composed is not one of the members of its composed expressions.

Isn't that a tautology ?

http://micro.magnet.fsu.edu/primer/java/speedoflight/

I have explained to you why that is. The photon itself is always traveling at c.

 

[ehcks]

Since I'm in this thread anyway... Does a photon have infinite acceleration; or does it, because its speed means it doesn't experience time, have no acceleration?

Or do I have the idea wrong, and a photon doesn't accelerate because it's instantly created with that speed? It wasn't ever not moving so it didn't change velocity at all.

 

[realpaladin]

Since I'm in this thread anyway... Does a photon have infinite acceleration; or does it, because its speed means it doesn't experience time, have no acceleration?

Or do I have the idea wrong, and a photon doesn't accelerate because it's instantly created with that speed? It wasn't ever not moving so it didn't change velocity at all.

This question is a good example of (no offense intended) trying to view everything from a naive 'what my gut tells me' point of view.

Any photon ever travels at c. It never has speed 0, it starts off with c because any massless particle can only travel at c.

First off, you are looking at it from a Newtonian point of view, or rather macroscopic point of view, where 'objects' have rest, acceleration and velocity.

At the scale where photons 'live' things are different and wholly unintuitive.
Keep in mind that light also behaves as an electromagnetic wave (whilst at the same time behaving as a particle).

This forum is not the best place to find an answer, I suggest you spend a few hours with Google

 

[doronshadmi]

Isn't that a tautology ?

No, the simplest state of existence is the substance of any multiplicity, including contradiction and tautology, as given, for example, in http://www.sciencechatforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=51&t=27823#p269007 and http://www.sciencechatforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=51&t=27823#p269301.

I have explained to you why that is. The photon itself is always traveling at c.

Wrong, it is changed according to the medium, as clearly given by http://micro.magnet.fsu.edu/primer/java/speedoflight/ or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_light#In_a_medium.

 

[ehcks]

Wrong, it is changed according to the medium, as clearly given by http://micro.magnet.fsu.edu/primer/java/speedoflight/ or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_light#In_a_medium.

That's propagation of light, not the speed of light.

 

[doronshadmi]

I told you: objective evidence is evidence that doesn't change (is invariant) depending on the observer. For instance, a colour-blind person can still see using instruments that something reflects light at a certain frequency.

No, objective evidence is simply external to the observer, and it is definitely changeable, exactly as the subjective experience in one's mind is changeable.

The only thing that is actually invariant is the simplest state of existence, which is the invariant substance of all possible changeable phenomena, whether they are objective or subjective.