[MD] False Messiah

[Scott Roberts]

SA,

SA said:
     Scott, thanks for explaining about photons.  I do
remember now, that's what Einstein postulated.  Yet,
what of gravity that is none other than space-time?

Scott:
What of it? Mass is another dimension. It too is created by consciousness in 
the act of perception -- in this case through the sense of touch.

SA said:
If, consciousness does this too, then what is the
difference between consciousness and gravity according
to what you are saying?

Scott:
This question is mixing up categories. Gravity is a static inorganic pattern 
of value, like electromagnetism, and so forth. What I am trying to reject is 
the notion that consciousness is just another pattern *along with* such 
static patterns. Instead, I say that all those patterns that we observe with 
our senses are, in their macroscopic appearance, created in the act of 
perception. All our physics before quantum physics (including gravity) is, 
then, a study of the patterns that our senses have turned the quantum world 
into. Quantum physics is an attempt to provide a mathematical structure of 
non-spatiotemporal reality which lends itself to being turned into 
spatiotemporal reality.

SA said:
  And since photons wouldn't
notice space-time, yet, everything else would that is
not traveling at the speed of light, then would
everything else be subjected to events of space-time
and our consciousness would be of those events
recognizing space-time.

Scott:
No. We are subjected to reality beyond ourselves, of course -- we can't fly, 
for instance -- but spacetime is, so to speak, a particular, but limited 
projection of that reality. So it is perfectly legitimate to describe our 
physical limitations in spatiotemporal terms, since that is how we 
experience them. What I am arguing against is the idea that consciousness 
itself can be explained in spatiotemporal terms.


SA said:
  Unless our consciousness is
traveling at the speed of light, but since we do
recognize space-time then this would be false.  How
this fits into False Messiah I am not sure?  It is
interesting, but I'm missing how this angles into the
subject.  I am not dismissing this, obviously, because
I am discussing and asking questions about it, but my
natural inclination (habitual way of approaching
various 'things') is to put them together into some
kind of coherent understanding, even if, that
coherency is open-ended.

Scott:
Discussions go off on tangents. DMB started this thread with his usual 
anti-Christian rant. Peter joined in, with a general attack on faith. I 
responded in support of faith, and in that made a remark about the 
inconsistenct between quantum physics and neo-Darwinism. He asked for an 
elaboration. You are responding to that elaboration. Feel free to change the 
subject line if it bothers you.

- Scott