-
The Fedora Lounge is supported in part by commission earning affiliate links sitewide. Please support us by using them. You may learn more here.
Explain the 3-Sphere to me.
- Thread starter Tiki Tom
- Start date
Featured products
-
John Lofgren Monkey Boots Shinki Horsebuttt - $1,136 The classic monkey boot silhouette in an incredibly rich Shinki russet horse leather. -
Grant Stone Diesel Boot Dark Olive Chromexcel - $395 Goodyear welted, Horween Chromexcel, classic good looks. -
Schott 568 Vandals Jacket - $1,250 The classic Perfecto motorcycle jacket, in a very special limited-edition Schott double rider style.
Tiki Tom
My Mail is Forwarded Here
- Messages
- 3,408
- Location
- Oahu, North Polynesia
We seem to be in general agreement that (probably) consciousness is the most fundamental thing. It is more likely that consciousness generates space/time/matter than that space/time/matter generates consciousness. (Is this really so? I can hear the materialists scoffing!). But If this is the case, it then seems likely that human consciousness is not wholly brain generated and that it is fair to hypothesize that consciousness survives the death of the body in some form. Despite the objection of materialists, there does seem to be some evidence that consciousness survives. We can debate the strengths and weaknesses of the evidence another time.
But this is where I’m currently stuck:
When you die does your personal consciousness Dissolve into a vast sea of impersonal consciousness? What is the point of all these human spikes of personal consciousness that appear and then vanish? Or, instead of a drop of water vanishing in the ocean, does the single defined drop take on the characteristics of the ocean? Do we reincarnate to a (hopefully) higher level of consciousness? Are there creatures with higher levels of consciousness than humans? Is it a continuum? On what do we base this wild speculation? (Well, there are clearly creatures with lower consciousness than us, so…). Is the whole point to want to transcend any sense of self? Have we reached “the wall” on this topic? Is it impossible to ever know more? Yet, there are those who claim that it is possible to attain higher consciousness in this life. What does that even mean?
How does a person who is sincerely seeking begin to move in the right direction? BTW, I’m crappy at meditation (better at prayer, but still not good). It’s not likely that I’ll be flying to Tibet to sit on a mountain top anytime soon. What is a wannabe Jedi Master to do???
But this is where I’m currently stuck:
When you die does your personal consciousness Dissolve into a vast sea of impersonal consciousness? What is the point of all these human spikes of personal consciousness that appear and then vanish? Or, instead of a drop of water vanishing in the ocean, does the single defined drop take on the characteristics of the ocean? Do we reincarnate to a (hopefully) higher level of consciousness? Are there creatures with higher levels of consciousness than humans? Is it a continuum? On what do we base this wild speculation? (Well, there are clearly creatures with lower consciousness than us, so…). Is the whole point to want to transcend any sense of self? Have we reached “the wall” on this topic? Is it impossible to ever know more? Yet, there are those who claim that it is possible to attain higher consciousness in this life. What does that even mean?
How does a person who is sincerely seeking begin to move in the right direction? BTW, I’m crappy at meditation (better at prayer, but still not good). It’s not likely that I’ll be flying to Tibet to sit on a mountain top anytime soon. What is a wannabe Jedi Master to do???
Last edited:
Benny Holiday
My Mail is Forwarded Here
- Messages
- 3,808
- Location
- Sydney Australia
Well first off amigo: "Beware . . . anger, fear aggression. The dark side are they." lol
All the major religions, bar Christianity, believe in some other, or higher, form of consciousness, be it reincarnation in Hindusim or enlightenment in Buddhism and so on. They also teach that one can only attain Nirvana, or perfection, by one's own merits, where Christianity hugely differs by saying that as heirs of an original sinner, we can't become holy of our own merit, but need the atoning sacrifice of someone both God and man to redeem us from slavery to our baser natures.
Now, I can imagine your average Joe saying, hang on a second Benny boy, whaddya mean Christianity doesn't teach a higher form of consciousness? What about heaven and hell, etc? Well, in all my reading and exploring, I've discovered that what the Bible says about such things differs greatly than the traditional teachings of the church, derived from the medieval church.
For instance, most Western people have a notion that people have an immortal soul inside them that either goes to heaven or hell when they die. But Genesis 2:7 reads, "Yahweh God formed man from the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul." Some translations say a 'living being.' So a soul is the body plus an animating spark of life given by God. A soul isn't some mystical presence that floats around after someone dies.
The Greek word for breath, pneuma, can be translated as breath, spirit, or wind, depending on the context, and this is where you've got to be careful with foreign languages, interpretations, ancient cultures, and context. This is where confusion and misunderstandings originate. You have to consider who the author was writing to and the culture of the time and place.
What happens at death, then? The opposite of life: Ecclesiastes 12:7 "Then the dust of mortals goes back to the ground as it was before, and the breath of life goes back to God who gave it."
So the Bible, at least, doesn't make reference to a ghost-type spirit. And just to make it plain:
Ecclesiastes 9: 5-6: "For the living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing;
they have no further reward, and even their name is forgotten. Their love, their hate
and their jealousy have long since vanished; never again will they have a part
in anything that happens under the sun."
John 11:11-14: "After he had said this, he went on to tell them, “Our friend Lazarus has fallen asleep; but I am going there to wake him up.” His disciples replied, “Lord, if he sleeps, he will get better.” Jesus had been speaking of his death, but his disciples thought he meant natural sleep. So then he told them plainly, “Lazarus is dead, and for your sake I am glad I was not there, so that you may believe. But let us go to him.”
So Jesus Himself says death is like an unconscious sleep. So where did the idea of an immortal soul come from?
Genesis 3:2-5: "The woman said to the serpent, “We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, but God did say, ‘You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.’”
“You will not certainly die,” the serpent said to the woman. “For God knows that when you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”
You won't die, the evil one said through the world's first medium. You will become like God. None of the other animals in the garden could talk. Clearly, the serpent had eaten the fruit and it was now elevated to some higher form of existence. The woman chose to believe it over Yahweh.
And of course, there's nothing pure people won't try to corrupt. The medieval church mixed pagan notions of Hades and the afterlife with Christianity to convince people to pay "indulgences" to get their loved ones out of purgatory or hell. But the Bible only says people will go to heaven at the resurrection, the second coming of Christ.
Man, that was a lot to write. That's the Christian perspective. Hinduism and Buddhism etc are entirely different from what I know.
All the major religions, bar Christianity, believe in some other, or higher, form of consciousness, be it reincarnation in Hindusim or enlightenment in Buddhism and so on. They also teach that one can only attain Nirvana, or perfection, by one's own merits, where Christianity hugely differs by saying that as heirs of an original sinner, we can't become holy of our own merit, but need the atoning sacrifice of someone both God and man to redeem us from slavery to our baser natures.
Now, I can imagine your average Joe saying, hang on a second Benny boy, whaddya mean Christianity doesn't teach a higher form of consciousness? What about heaven and hell, etc? Well, in all my reading and exploring, I've discovered that what the Bible says about such things differs greatly than the traditional teachings of the church, derived from the medieval church.
For instance, most Western people have a notion that people have an immortal soul inside them that either goes to heaven or hell when they die. But Genesis 2:7 reads, "Yahweh God formed man from the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul." Some translations say a 'living being.' So a soul is the body plus an animating spark of life given by God. A soul isn't some mystical presence that floats around after someone dies.
The Greek word for breath, pneuma, can be translated as breath, spirit, or wind, depending on the context, and this is where you've got to be careful with foreign languages, interpretations, ancient cultures, and context. This is where confusion and misunderstandings originate. You have to consider who the author was writing to and the culture of the time and place.
What happens at death, then? The opposite of life: Ecclesiastes 12:7 "Then the dust of mortals goes back to the ground as it was before, and the breath of life goes back to God who gave it."
So the Bible, at least, doesn't make reference to a ghost-type spirit. And just to make it plain:
Ecclesiastes 9: 5-6: "For the living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing;
they have no further reward, and even their name is forgotten. Their love, their hate
and their jealousy have long since vanished; never again will they have a part
in anything that happens under the sun."
John 11:11-14: "After he had said this, he went on to tell them, “Our friend Lazarus has fallen asleep; but I am going there to wake him up.” His disciples replied, “Lord, if he sleeps, he will get better.” Jesus had been speaking of his death, but his disciples thought he meant natural sleep. So then he told them plainly, “Lazarus is dead, and for your sake I am glad I was not there, so that you may believe. But let us go to him.”
So Jesus Himself says death is like an unconscious sleep. So where did the idea of an immortal soul come from?
Genesis 3:2-5: "The woman said to the serpent, “We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, but God did say, ‘You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.’”
“You will not certainly die,” the serpent said to the woman. “For God knows that when you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”
You won't die, the evil one said through the world's first medium. You will become like God. None of the other animals in the garden could talk. Clearly, the serpent had eaten the fruit and it was now elevated to some higher form of existence. The woman chose to believe it over Yahweh.
And of course, there's nothing pure people won't try to corrupt. The medieval church mixed pagan notions of Hades and the afterlife with Christianity to convince people to pay "indulgences" to get their loved ones out of purgatory or hell. But the Bible only says people will go to heaven at the resurrection, the second coming of Christ.
Man, that was a lot to write. That's the Christian perspective. Hinduism and Buddhism etc are entirely different from what I know.
Tiki Tom
My Mail is Forwarded Here
- Messages
- 3,408
- Location
- Oahu, North Polynesia
Tiki Tom
My Mail is Forwarded Here
- Messages
- 3,408
- Location
- Oahu, North Polynesia
At first I was not sure whether to post this here or under Agents of F.L.A.S.K.
It is certainly weird, but because it deals with the nature of consciousness, I opted for this thread.
So, a California startup company, REMspace, claims it has achieved a milestone: Two people who were sleeping in separate locations have (supposedly) communicated with each other through their dreams. A single word was passed between them.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/science...eption-two-way-dream-communication-study.html
Company execs say this will revolutionize communications. Important to note that the findings have yet to be verified or replicated independently.
Still, if true, this would set our understanding of the universe on its head. Extrasensory Perception and Remote Viewing would suddenly be plausible. Materialist arguments regarding the nature of consciousness would be severely challenged.
This reminds me of research in Colorado to see if two individuals on DMT could communicate in the DMT-induced alternate reality.* I’ll see if I can find the link. Voila!
https://newrepublic.com/article/169525/psychonauts-training-psychedelics-dmt-extended-state
It all just goes to show that there is some really funky research into the nature of consciousness going on.
I guess we will have to stay tuned to see if this dream communication business is warm spit or a serious breakthrough. Don’t hold your breath.
* I actually know a guy who says he’s taken DMT three times. He swears it was a reality bending experience that took him somewhere else. I personally would not experiment with DMT.
It is certainly weird, but because it deals with the nature of consciousness, I opted for this thread.
So, a California startup company, REMspace, claims it has achieved a milestone: Two people who were sleeping in separate locations have (supposedly) communicated with each other through their dreams. A single word was passed between them.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/science...eption-two-way-dream-communication-study.html
Company execs say this will revolutionize communications. Important to note that the findings have yet to be verified or replicated independently.
Still, if true, this would set our understanding of the universe on its head. Extrasensory Perception and Remote Viewing would suddenly be plausible. Materialist arguments regarding the nature of consciousness would be severely challenged.
This reminds me of research in Colorado to see if two individuals on DMT could communicate in the DMT-induced alternate reality.* I’ll see if I can find the link. Voila!
https://newrepublic.com/article/169525/psychonauts-training-psychedelics-dmt-extended-state
It all just goes to show that there is some really funky research into the nature of consciousness going on.
I guess we will have to stay tuned to see if this dream communication business is warm spit or a serious breakthrough. Don’t hold your breath.
* I actually know a guy who says he’s taken DMT three times. He swears it was a reality bending experience that took him somewhere else. I personally would not experiment with DMT.
Last edited:
My dad used to know sometimes when something happened. It's the same as when identical twins sometimes know what's going on with the other. That in itself should disrupt our understanding of the material world and the nature of consciousness.
In my world there's such a thing as a "knowingness". It's how many dogs inherently know who they can trust. It's how geese know which way to go as the weather turns. It's a connectedness. It's how my dad knew things.
One Drop
One of the Regulars
- Messages
- 243
- Location
- Swiss Alps
This to me smacks of the kind of theories that are always arise when a new technology is invented or discovered, or a new unrelated phenomena is discovered, to try and apply it to other theoretical sciences. It's akin to the behavioural theories that followed the discovery of conditioning, as an example.
Yes one could say that this is a simulation, but it's not a computer simulation. All things are of the substance of a dream. You are the Creator, but it's only via the perceived limitations of time & space that the need for creation arises, when in fact all things are perfect exactly as they are. Things only get developed further because of your perceived limitations. This is something that science and the intellect can't touch and never will.
Hey I like your signature. It reminds me of this one:You won't know if something is worth knowing until you know it.
"There is no use trying," said Alice; "one can't believe impossible things."
"I dare say you haven't had much practice," said the Queen. "When I was your age, I always did it for half an hour a day. Why, sometimes I've believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast."
Some trackers in the American west - and many Native Americans - knew not to stare at someone too long if you don't want to get caught. If your gaze holds on someone for too long, they'll sense they're being watched. This is known by many people. It's been proven in scientific studies. Recently I watched in a video a CIA agent talking about tailing a person. He said the same thing, to not hold the gaze for too long. He says they trained themselves to watch a man's feet instead.
These are facts, but we shrug them off because we can't really wrap our heads around them. We can find no logical explanation. In my experience it's another example of a knowingness, a connectedness. Some will call it access to "divine intelligence" but I don't want to try to make it a mystical experience or a religious one. It's just truth; It's just how things really are.
Leather_nube
One of the Regulars
- Messages
- 202
- Location
- EU mainland
I’m game for a read this evening if you fancy forwarding some of them.
Thanks for the challenge, but I learned this in a Youtube video a couple weeks ago. A mention, like "In a 2021 study at bla bla University..." What was reported sounded completely legit.
Tiki Tom
My Mail is Forwarded Here
- Messages
- 3,408
- Location
- Oahu, North Polynesia
Cambridge PhD Rupert Sheldrake did a fascinating experiment indicating that people can sense when they are being stared at:
https://www.sheldrake.org/research/...ing-stared-at-confirmed-by-simple-experiments
He also did a great and thoroughly convincing experiment that attempts to show that dogs really do “know” when their masters are leaving the office and heading for home.
That said, Dr Sheldrake is a controversial figure. As I recall, a Bunch of more skeptical scientists once got him temporarily banned from doing TED Talks. Sheldrake does have some ideas that are pretty far out there.
Regarding ESP in general, Daryl Bem, a professor at Cornel University (I believe) did a series of experiments that supported the reality of the phenomenon. His experiments blew-up the social sciences and are still being debated today. However, importantly, he purposely designed the experiments so that they could be replicated. Some years later he did a meta analysis of some 90 reproductions of his experiments at 33 universities worldwide. The results seem to confirm that certain aspects of ESP are real. The results are statistically significant but weak. Ever since, skeptics and supporters have been arguing about statistical methodologies, etc. His work and the meta analysis are easy to Google.
https://slate.com/health-and-scienc...ved-esp-is-real-showed-science-is-broken.html
Also worth Googling is the “Ganzfeld Experiment“ in which people are put in sensory deprivation conditions in one room, and then a person in the next room tries to mentally send an image to the first person. It seems clear that the results surpass random chance.
https://parapsych.org/articles/36/64/3_esp_in_the_ganzfeld.aspx
Also very interesting: Look up Joe Mcmoneagle. Read his bio. He is clearly the real deal. If not, why was he awarded the Legion of Merit medal? But what to make of him? It’s a mystery to me.
Anyway, Read the studies and draw your own conclusions. It’s also useful to read the skeptics rebuttals… if only to see that the skeptics are also deeply biased.
https://www.sheldrake.org/research/...ing-stared-at-confirmed-by-simple-experiments
He also did a great and thoroughly convincing experiment that attempts to show that dogs really do “know” when their masters are leaving the office and heading for home.
That said, Dr Sheldrake is a controversial figure. As I recall, a Bunch of more skeptical scientists once got him temporarily banned from doing TED Talks. Sheldrake does have some ideas that are pretty far out there.
Regarding ESP in general, Daryl Bem, a professor at Cornel University (I believe) did a series of experiments that supported the reality of the phenomenon. His experiments blew-up the social sciences and are still being debated today. However, importantly, he purposely designed the experiments so that they could be replicated. Some years later he did a meta analysis of some 90 reproductions of his experiments at 33 universities worldwide. The results seem to confirm that certain aspects of ESP are real. The results are statistically significant but weak. Ever since, skeptics and supporters have been arguing about statistical methodologies, etc. His work and the meta analysis are easy to Google.
https://slate.com/health-and-scienc...ved-esp-is-real-showed-science-is-broken.html
Also worth Googling is the “Ganzfeld Experiment“ in which people are put in sensory deprivation conditions in one room, and then a person in the next room tries to mentally send an image to the first person. It seems clear that the results surpass random chance.
https://parapsych.org/articles/36/64/3_esp_in_the_ganzfeld.aspx
Also very interesting: Look up Joe Mcmoneagle. Read his bio. He is clearly the real deal. If not, why was he awarded the Legion of Merit medal? But what to make of him? It’s a mystery to me.
Anyway, Read the studies and draw your own conclusions. It’s also useful to read the skeptics rebuttals… if only to see that the skeptics are also deeply biased.
Last edited:
Bingo! Rupert Sheldrake. Woo hoo!
@Leather_nube I searched back through my YT history and found the video that references this information, along with the mention of surveillance professionals (I thought it was FBI) knowing this naturally.
Review this:
Leather_nube
One of the Regulars
- Messages
- 202
- Location
- EU mainland
Tiki Tom
My Mail is Forwarded Here
- Messages
- 3,408
- Location
- Oahu, North Polynesia
Here is something I just heard about: We all already know about the famous double slit experiment in which the wave function will collapse if the photon is being observed. Well, this wild experiment takes it to the next level. Forget ”observation”. Dr Dean Radin and his colleagues have theorized that the wave function will collapse If you even ”think about” that photon. Crazy interesting stuff! And, yes, they are testing the hypothesis.
https://www.researchgate.net/public...ble-slit_interference_pattern_Six_experiments
Of course, there is plenty of conversation about this all over the internet, pro and con, and they are trying to identify and nail down any weaknesses the experiment may have.
Nonetheless, it is Fascinating and shines another light on consciousness. Again, what is the bedrock that reality is built upon, spacetime and matter? Or consciousness?
https://www.researchgate.net/public...ble-slit_interference_pattern_Six_experiments
Of course, there is plenty of conversation about this all over the internet, pro and con, and they are trying to identify and nail down any weaknesses the experiment may have.
Nonetheless, it is Fascinating and shines another light on consciousness. Again, what is the bedrock that reality is built upon, spacetime and matter? Or consciousness?
This conversation will continue to be dangerous, like politics or religion, in that most of us are likely to be firmly entrenched in our own specific set of beliefs. Myself, I'm absolutely certain of my deeply held understanding of radical subjectivity/a consciousness-based reality. But I've mentioned these things here earlier.
I do find it quite interesting how we apply the scientific method to questions like this, when in fact the answers lie beyond the intellect, beyond our ability to logically deduce the solutions.
I do find it quite interesting how we apply the scientific method to questions like this, when in fact the answers lie beyond the intellect, beyond our ability to logically deduce the solutions.
Tiki Tom
My Mail is Forwarded Here
- Messages
- 3,408
- Location
- Oahu, North Polynesia
A psychic working on a cold missing persons case found a body buried in the woods. Unfortunately it was not the body that her client asked her to find.
https://q1065.fm/jay-maine-human-remains/
its interesting that the tone of the article ALMOST takes it for granted that psychic abilities are genuine. Of course those who do not believe in psychic powers will write off the finding of a body as a coincidence. Seems like astronomically long odds to me.
https://q1065.fm/jay-maine-human-remains/
its interesting that the tone of the article ALMOST takes it for granted that psychic abilities are genuine. Of course those who do not believe in psychic powers will write off the finding of a body as a coincidence. Seems like astronomically long odds to me.
Last edited:
Yes.
It's just like divining. Like divining for water or minerals. It is 100% valid. However, there are many "magician" types who don't believe in it one bit, but manage to convince some people that they can do it. Then there are many who do believe they can do it, when in fact they can't really manage it with any accuracy at all.
Tiki Tom
My Mail is Forwarded Here
- Messages
- 3,408
- Location
- Oahu, North Polynesia
Well. This is on topic: “Can people really sense that someone is looking at them?”
