Posted on 05/01/2017 9:06:53 PM PDT by Titus-Maximus
Excerpt
A scientific swamp
Then, too, in the last few decades there has been considerable discussion of a basic paradox in the construction of the universe. Why are the laws of physics exactly balanced for animal life to exist? There are over 200 physical parameters within the solar system and universe so exact that it strains credulity to propose that they are random — even if that is exactly what standard contemporary physics baldly suggests. These fundamental constants of the universe — constants that are not predicted by any theory — all seem to be carefully chosen, often with great precision, to allow for existence of life and consciousness (yes, consciousness raises its annoying head yet another time).
We have absolutely no reasonable explanation for this. When it comes right down to it, today’s science is amazingly good at figuring out how the parts work. What eludes us is the big picture. We provide interim answers, we create exquisite new technologies from our ever-expanding knowledge of physical processes. We do badly in just one area, which unfortunately encompasses all the bottom-line issues: What is the nature of this thing we call reality, the universe as a whole?
/snip/
Consciousness is not just an issue for biologists; it’s a problem for physics. There is nothing in modern physics that explains how a group of molecules in a brain creates consciousness. The beauty of a sunset, the taste of a delicious meal, these are all mysteries to science — which can sometimes pin down where in the brain the sensations arise, but not how and why there is any subjective personal experience to begin with. And, what’s worse, nothing in science can explain how consciousness arose from matter. Our understanding of this most basic phenomenon is virtually nil. Interestingly, most models of physics do not even recognize this as a problem.
“Life creates the universe, instead of the other way around”
This is meaningless. And no one says the universe creates life.
“nothing can be perceived that is not already interacting with our consciousness”
This is also tautological nonsense. It’s like saying, “nothing can be sensed which isn’t sensed”.
(Still, thanks for posting).
I AM THAT I AM
“I AM THAT I AM”
Ok, explain.
Popular books are meaningless.
There are a lot of enjoyable self-promoters.
Where the data?
“I AM THAT I AM”
Ok, explain.
I will leave that Kurt Godel.
Why are the laws of physics exactly balanced for animal life to exist?
When science ventures too far into ‘why’ as opposed to ‘how,’ it becomes religion.
Thanks.
Onus is on him to show it.
Re-read my a and b.
I read more about his book.
It’s old wine in a new skin.
You’re right.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/1577385/posts
https://www.amazon.com/Self-Aware-Universe-Amit-Goswami-ebook/dp/B001QWDS1Y
https://www.amazon.com/Self-Aware-Universe-Consciousness-Creates-Material/dp/0874777984
https://www.thoughtco.com/is-consciousness-related-to-quantum-physics-2698801
http://www.amitgoswami.org/2016/11/23/god-is-not-dead/
http://www.amitgoswami.org/2016/06/21/what-the-bleep-do-we-know/
“This is also tautological nonsense.”
Ok then.
“My next post will be true.”
Thanks.
What about this guy and his ideas do you like the most?
Nothing you can do that can’t be done
Nothing you can sing that can’t be sung
Oooooh. Deep, man.
I love the idea that materialist science cannot explain the gaps in evolution — they’re quantum leaps. Only “the God hypothesis” can explain the discontinuity.
I love the idea that it works downward from consciousness rather than upward from minuscule particles. This means that everything is Consciousness (God) in form.
I love the tangled hierarchy of the Universe needing us and us needing the Universe.
The more of Goswami I read, the more I like him. I’m taking a distance education course from him currently.
“My previous post was false.”
Thanks.
Did you ever read Tao of Physics or Dancing Wu-Li Masters?
Yes, both.
” I’m taking a distance education course from him currently.”
Cool!
Send me the link for that. I may be interested.
I have read a lot of his stuff, and like you, I find his work very appealing.
All other quantum physicists are afraid to go where Goswami goes. Something about their materialist presuppositions I suppose. Whereas Goswami, being Buddhist (I think), doesn’t seem afraid of using his presuppositional argument to help understand his QM observations. Just replace his Buddhist presuppositions with Christian Trinity and we have it.
“materialists who dominate science have it backwards. They preach what he calls “upward causation””
“works on the exact opposite principle, which he refers to as “downward causation.” He says that “consciousness is the ground of all being” and it is from the consciousness of God that everything comes.”
A simple example of this is
E=mc^2
Upward causation, using the material m to determine energy.
But downward causation would have material m coming from the energy,
conscious. We have..
m=E/c^2
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.