I could be mistaken, but I believe the sensations you will experience from these experiments are the result of gravity acting on your arms (#1) or your whole body (#2) — EricH
Newton's gravity was imagined as a pulling force, that was different from all other forces, which push. Einstein's gravity is not a "force", so you can't sense it directly. Instead, you "feel" the effects of that geometric change of direction on your body. For example, technically, the centrifugal "force" you feel when whirling in circles, is not gravity, but internal stresses due to non-straight-line motion. Modern, Einsteinian Physics is counter-intuitive, because much of it is Meta-physical.
Feeling of Gravity : Locally you cannot feel a gravitational field. In ordinary life, as you walk across the earth, you don't feel gravity. What you feel is the mechanical stresses that are exerted by the earth against your feet, and then transmitted throughout your body.
https://www.av8n.com/physics/gravity-perception.htm
TPF : Quantum Philosophy
Re: TPF : Quantum Philosophy
So instead of arguing with Gnomon, I suggest that whoever is interested in carrying on a meaningful conversation, must create a different defintion from Gnomon's for "MP". — god must be atheist
Which do you prefer : the simple vernacular definition of MP, or the various abstruse mathematical definitions? I post links to the definitions used by physicists. But most viewers don't click the links. So they are not aware that "Gnomon's definition" is completely compatible with modern quantum physics. My ad hoc disambiguation definition above is intended to make a clear distinction between the vernacular definition and the technical definition, in terms that are easy to understand. Besides, even Newton's physics was grounded on supernatural assumptions : God was an axiom. The whole point of "Gnomon's definition" is to disambiguate a murky concept.
Newton’s Metaphysics of Space as God’s Emanative Effect : https://link.springer.com/article/10.10 ... 014-0142-8
Which do you prefer : the simple vernacular definition of MP, or the various abstruse mathematical definitions? I post links to the definitions used by physicists. But most viewers don't click the links. So they are not aware that "Gnomon's definition" is completely compatible with modern quantum physics. My ad hoc disambiguation definition above is intended to make a clear distinction between the vernacular definition and the technical definition, in terms that are easy to understand. Besides, even Newton's physics was grounded on supernatural assumptions : God was an axiom. The whole point of "Gnomon's definition" is to disambiguate a murky concept.
Newton’s Metaphysics of Space as God’s Emanative Effect : https://link.springer.com/article/10.10 ... 014-0142-8
Re: TPF : Quantum Philosophy
These statements have no literal meaning. They are very much like all religious statements, they are a type of imaginative poetry. — EricH
I have no training in Physics, beyond 101 courses, and 50 years of reading science. So, I am aware that, officially, the science of Physics does not concern itself with "meaning". But this is a Philosophy forum, and that discipline does concern itself with meaning and human values. When the OP titled this thread, he, perhaps unwittingly, included the Search for Meaning in the topic. And that's what got my attention. Modern Philosophy is inherently Metaphysical, because Modern Science took on the task of understanding the physical world, and left the non-physical topics for feckless philosophers to debate endlessly, while science actually made progress on many fronts.
Ironically, three big steps in that progression of knowledge have raised embarrassing questions about the Materialist assumptions that physics, since Aristotle, was based on. That quantum leap opened doors for Philosophical progress, which were closed since Galileo. Physics asks specific questions about Particular things, and reasons by reductive analysis. Philosophy though, asks general questions about Universals, and reasons by synthetic theories. Hence, when empirical scientists produce General theories about Universals, such as Evolution and Theories of Everything, they are inadvertently doing philosophy.
Those 20th century diversions into philosophy were Quantum Physics, Systems Theory, and Information Theory. Together, they have revealed that the foundations of Reality are not Material, but Mathematical, Holistic & Informational. The 21st century role of Leucippus' "Atom" is now filled by a "bit" of Information, as noted above. The "queer" worldview painted by those new fields of study has been quickly adopted by Theologians, New Agers, and Mystics. Hence, it has been rejected by those who favor the ancient theory of Materialism. Yet, although I fit in none of those categories, I have accepted the philosophical implications of 21st century Science, that still make some philosophers uncomfortable. I didn't intend to discomfit the OP with a 21st century worldview. But I was not completely surprised at his closed-minded reception.
Philosophy : (from Greek: φιλοσοφία, philosophia, 'love of wisdom') is the study of general and fundamental questions about existence, knowledge, values, reason, mind, and language. ... Philosophical methods include questioning, critical discussion, rational argument, and systematic presentation.
The Meaning of Life : https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/life-meaning/
Meta-Physics : [ Physicist, Cosmologist, Astrobiologist ] Paul Davies makes a provocative claim. ''The new physics,'' he writes, ''has overturned so many commonsense notions of space, time and matter that no serious religious thinker can ignore it.''
https://www.csmonitor.com/1983/1104/110407.html
Information and the Nature of Reality: From Physics to Metaphysics : Many scientists regard mass and energy as the primary currency of nature. In recent years, however, the concept of information has gained importance. Why? In this book, eminent scientists, philosophers and theologians chart various aspects of information, from quantum information to biological and digital information, in order to understand how nature works. Beginning with an historical treatment of the topic, the book also examines physical and biological approaches to information, and its philosophical, theological and ethical implications.
https://books.google.com/books/about/In ... 6oQq8lN-YC
"If you think you understand quantum mechanics, you don't understand quantum mechanics."
___Richard Feynman
I have no training in Physics, beyond 101 courses, and 50 years of reading science. So, I am aware that, officially, the science of Physics does not concern itself with "meaning". But this is a Philosophy forum, and that discipline does concern itself with meaning and human values. When the OP titled this thread, he, perhaps unwittingly, included the Search for Meaning in the topic. And that's what got my attention. Modern Philosophy is inherently Metaphysical, because Modern Science took on the task of understanding the physical world, and left the non-physical topics for feckless philosophers to debate endlessly, while science actually made progress on many fronts.
Ironically, three big steps in that progression of knowledge have raised embarrassing questions about the Materialist assumptions that physics, since Aristotle, was based on. That quantum leap opened doors for Philosophical progress, which were closed since Galileo. Physics asks specific questions about Particular things, and reasons by reductive analysis. Philosophy though, asks general questions about Universals, and reasons by synthetic theories. Hence, when empirical scientists produce General theories about Universals, such as Evolution and Theories of Everything, they are inadvertently doing philosophy.
Those 20th century diversions into philosophy were Quantum Physics, Systems Theory, and Information Theory. Together, they have revealed that the foundations of Reality are not Material, but Mathematical, Holistic & Informational. The 21st century role of Leucippus' "Atom" is now filled by a "bit" of Information, as noted above. The "queer" worldview painted by those new fields of study has been quickly adopted by Theologians, New Agers, and Mystics. Hence, it has been rejected by those who favor the ancient theory of Materialism. Yet, although I fit in none of those categories, I have accepted the philosophical implications of 21st century Science, that still make some philosophers uncomfortable. I didn't intend to discomfit the OP with a 21st century worldview. But I was not completely surprised at his closed-minded reception.
Philosophy : (from Greek: φιλοσοφία, philosophia, 'love of wisdom') is the study of general and fundamental questions about existence, knowledge, values, reason, mind, and language. ... Philosophical methods include questioning, critical discussion, rational argument, and systematic presentation.
The Meaning of Life : https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/life-meaning/
Meta-Physics : [ Physicist, Cosmologist, Astrobiologist ] Paul Davies makes a provocative claim. ''The new physics,'' he writes, ''has overturned so many commonsense notions of space, time and matter that no serious religious thinker can ignore it.''
https://www.csmonitor.com/1983/1104/110407.html
Information and the Nature of Reality: From Physics to Metaphysics : Many scientists regard mass and energy as the primary currency of nature. In recent years, however, the concept of information has gained importance. Why? In this book, eminent scientists, philosophers and theologians chart various aspects of information, from quantum information to biological and digital information, in order to understand how nature works. Beginning with an historical treatment of the topic, the book also examines physical and biological approaches to information, and its philosophical, theological and ethical implications.
https://books.google.com/books/about/In ... 6oQq8lN-YC
"If you think you understand quantum mechanics, you don't understand quantum mechanics."
___Richard Feynman
Re: TPF : Quantum Philosophy
You, Gnomon, were kind enough to provide your own definition. It is not a faulty definition, since no consensus has been reached. But it is a rather useless definition, because it allows you to claim the presence of metaphysics in quantum mechaincs. Per your definition, it is perfectly valid. However, many people immediately conjure concepts of what metaphysics are, and disregard your defintion, and they therefore reject your claim. — god must be atheist
Isn't that how philosophy is done : first define your terms, then make your argument? I was forced to define the concept of "non-physical" or "virtual" reality, precisely because it's a debatable topic. Besides, those other definitions have no bearing on my argument. If my definition is not faulty, and it is pertinent to my topic, why call it "useless"? I am simply using the literal meaning of the word, beyond physical nature, instead of the supernatural accretions over the years. Those who think of Metaphysics as supernatural may "disregard" my definition. But they can't thereby claim to "defeat" my argument. My thesis stands or falls on its own definitions, not irrelevant notions. Metaphysics : the abstract side of reality.
Apparently, Aristotle thought "beyond-physics" was an important aspect of reality, because he devoted a whole volume to topics that didn't fit into the category of Physical Science. In volume 2, he was no longer discussing "facts" of physical reality, but human ideas or opinions about Reality. He even referred to it as "First Philosophy". Not merely after Physics, but prior to Physics in philosophical importance. When Quantum Physics refers to "Virtual" particles, are they materially real, or merely a not-yet-real (potential) aspect of "being as being"? Ghost particles, Entanglement, Tunneling , Spooky-action-at-a-distance. Do you deny that Quantum Physics is dabbling in Philosophy?
If you don't like my application of "Metaphysics" to Quantum Physics, just substitute "Philosophy" in its place. Is that still a "useless" definition for a thread entitled : "Quantum Physics and Philosophy"? What does philosophy study, if not the non-physical abstract qualities of human experience? One of those qualities is the non-physical property we call "Mind". Do you, like Darkneos, deny the existence of Minds, just because they can't be examined under a microscope? Is non-physical "Mind" (below) a "useless definition"?
How does Aristotle define metaphysics? :
What is known to us as metaphysics is what Aristotle called "first philosophy." Metaphysics involves a study of the universal principles of being, the abstract qualities of existence itself. Perhaps the starting point of Aristotle's metaphysics is his rejection of Plato's Theory of Forms.
https://www.sparknotes.com/biography/ar ... /section7/
Virtual : The definition of virtual is something that exists in the mind, exists in essence but not in fact or created by a computer. An example of virtual is an imaginary friend. An example of virtual is a world created by a computer video game.
https://www.yourdictionary.com/virtual
Mind : (in a human or other conscious being) the element, part, substance, or process that reasons, thinks, feels, wills, perceives, judges, etc.: the processes of the human mind. ...
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/mind
Isn't that how philosophy is done : first define your terms, then make your argument? I was forced to define the concept of "non-physical" or "virtual" reality, precisely because it's a debatable topic. Besides, those other definitions have no bearing on my argument. If my definition is not faulty, and it is pertinent to my topic, why call it "useless"? I am simply using the literal meaning of the word, beyond physical nature, instead of the supernatural accretions over the years. Those who think of Metaphysics as supernatural may "disregard" my definition. But they can't thereby claim to "defeat" my argument. My thesis stands or falls on its own definitions, not irrelevant notions. Metaphysics : the abstract side of reality.
Apparently, Aristotle thought "beyond-physics" was an important aspect of reality, because he devoted a whole volume to topics that didn't fit into the category of Physical Science. In volume 2, he was no longer discussing "facts" of physical reality, but human ideas or opinions about Reality. He even referred to it as "First Philosophy". Not merely after Physics, but prior to Physics in philosophical importance. When Quantum Physics refers to "Virtual" particles, are they materially real, or merely a not-yet-real (potential) aspect of "being as being"? Ghost particles, Entanglement, Tunneling , Spooky-action-at-a-distance. Do you deny that Quantum Physics is dabbling in Philosophy?
If you don't like my application of "Metaphysics" to Quantum Physics, just substitute "Philosophy" in its place. Is that still a "useless" definition for a thread entitled : "Quantum Physics and Philosophy"? What does philosophy study, if not the non-physical abstract qualities of human experience? One of those qualities is the non-physical property we call "Mind". Do you, like Darkneos, deny the existence of Minds, just because they can't be examined under a microscope? Is non-physical "Mind" (below) a "useless definition"?
How does Aristotle define metaphysics? :
What is known to us as metaphysics is what Aristotle called "first philosophy." Metaphysics involves a study of the universal principles of being, the abstract qualities of existence itself. Perhaps the starting point of Aristotle's metaphysics is his rejection of Plato's Theory of Forms.
https://www.sparknotes.com/biography/ar ... /section7/
Virtual : The definition of virtual is something that exists in the mind, exists in essence but not in fact or created by a computer. An example of virtual is an imaginary friend. An example of virtual is a world created by a computer video game.
https://www.yourdictionary.com/virtual
Mind : (in a human or other conscious being) the element, part, substance, or process that reasons, thinks, feels, wills, perceives, judges, etc.: the processes of the human mind. ...
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/mind
Re: TPF : Quantum Philosophy
objectionable for one reason and one reason only. You take a term that has been given some kind of aura, that is pervasive in its usage. Then you give it a very restrictive meaning, — god must be atheist
Do you think it's "objectionable" for a philosopher to disambiguate an ancient term with centuries of misleading accretions? I doubt that precision-of-definition is what you find objectionable. Instead, it's the materialist dogma that dismisses any hint of preternatural phenomena. Yet my definition says that Meta-physical Information (ideas, meanings, concepts) is indeed non-physical, but is completely Natural. Aristotle apparently thought it was an important distinction, even though he didn't give it a name. Personally, I think the name "Meta-physics" is descriptive & apt. So it shouldn't be offensive to anyone who acknowledges Ari's division of Science into the physical (volume 1) and the non-physical (vol 2) aspects of Natural Reality.
* Note 1 -- Energy is a mysterious & immaterial Ontological Cause that creates (enforms) & transforms tangible Matter. Yet Cause & Effect are erroneously lumped together under the heading of "Physics". But, for the purposes of my thesis, and Aristotle's, Causes are Meta-Physical. (Hume)
* "All of our experiences in life can be attributed to Energy. Metaphysical causes are a result of the energy manifesting its self as a physical outcome."
https://www.isygrigg.com/metaphysical-causes/
* Aristotle divided the theoretical sciences into three groups: physics, mathematics, and theology. He does, however, recognize the branch of philosophy now called metaphysics: he calls it “first philosophy” and defines it as the discipline that studies “being as being.” ...
https://www.britannica.com/biography/Ar ... etaphysics
* Note 2 -- In my thesis, I combine all of the non-physical groups under the heading of Meta-Physics. But, Information actually manifests in two forms : material and mental. If you are not familiar with cutting edge Information Theory, that statement may sound "objectionable". But the thesis attempts to ease the mental transition from either/or Materialism to both/and Enformationism.
The last part of my glossary definition says : "5. I use a hyphen in the spelling to indicate that I am not talking about Ghosts and Magic, but about Ontology (science of being)."
So... QM is full of instances of things visible only with our minds' eyes. True. Then what?
Where is the insight in this? What is the usefulness of stating this? — god must be atheist
The answer to your questions is in the Enformationism thesis. I give many examples to show how Information (e.g. Energy) can be both physical (matter) and non-physical (mind). It's the Prime Substance of our world. That "insight" is my minor contribution to the progress of philosophy. The "usefulness" of that insight may result in the reconciliation between estranged Philosophy & Science.
Prime Substance : The philosophical term ‘substance’ corresponds to the Greek ousia, which means ‘being’, transmitted via the Latin substantia, which means ‘something that stands under or grounds things’. . . .
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/substance/
Prime matter is matter with no substantial form of its own
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hylomorphism
* Note 3 -- Aristotle's "Prime Substance" and Spinoza's "Universal Substance" are what I call "Enformation" -- the power to give form to the formless. One aspect is "Energy".
Energy :
Scientists define “energy” as the ability to do work, but don't know what energy is. They assume it's an eternal causative force that existed prior to the Big Bang, along with mathematical laws. Energy is a positive or negative relationship between things, and physical Laws are limitations on the push & pull of those forces. So, all they know is what Energy does, which is to transform material objects in various ways. Energy itself is amorphous & immaterial. So if you reduce energy to its essence of information, it seems more akin to mind than matter.
http://blog-glossary.enformationism.info/page8.html
Enformationism :
A philosophical worldview or belief system grounded on the 20th century discovery that Information, rather than Matter, is the fundamental substance of everything in the universe. It is intended to be the 21st century successor to ancient Materialism. An Update from Bronze Age to Information Age. It's a Theory of Everything that covers, not just matter & energy, but also Life & Mind & Love.
http://blog-glossary.enformationism.info/page8.html
Do you think it's "objectionable" for a philosopher to disambiguate an ancient term with centuries of misleading accretions? I doubt that precision-of-definition is what you find objectionable. Instead, it's the materialist dogma that dismisses any hint of preternatural phenomena. Yet my definition says that Meta-physical Information (ideas, meanings, concepts) is indeed non-physical, but is completely Natural. Aristotle apparently thought it was an important distinction, even though he didn't give it a name. Personally, I think the name "Meta-physics" is descriptive & apt. So it shouldn't be offensive to anyone who acknowledges Ari's division of Science into the physical (volume 1) and the non-physical (vol 2) aspects of Natural Reality.
* Note 1 -- Energy is a mysterious & immaterial Ontological Cause that creates (enforms) & transforms tangible Matter. Yet Cause & Effect are erroneously lumped together under the heading of "Physics". But, for the purposes of my thesis, and Aristotle's, Causes are Meta-Physical. (Hume)
* "All of our experiences in life can be attributed to Energy. Metaphysical causes are a result of the energy manifesting its self as a physical outcome."
https://www.isygrigg.com/metaphysical-causes/
* Aristotle divided the theoretical sciences into three groups: physics, mathematics, and theology. He does, however, recognize the branch of philosophy now called metaphysics: he calls it “first philosophy” and defines it as the discipline that studies “being as being.” ...
https://www.britannica.com/biography/Ar ... etaphysics
* Note 2 -- In my thesis, I combine all of the non-physical groups under the heading of Meta-Physics. But, Information actually manifests in two forms : material and mental. If you are not familiar with cutting edge Information Theory, that statement may sound "objectionable". But the thesis attempts to ease the mental transition from either/or Materialism to both/and Enformationism.
The last part of my glossary definition says : "5. I use a hyphen in the spelling to indicate that I am not talking about Ghosts and Magic, but about Ontology (science of being)."
So... QM is full of instances of things visible only with our minds' eyes. True. Then what?
Where is the insight in this? What is the usefulness of stating this? — god must be atheist
The answer to your questions is in the Enformationism thesis. I give many examples to show how Information (e.g. Energy) can be both physical (matter) and non-physical (mind). It's the Prime Substance of our world. That "insight" is my minor contribution to the progress of philosophy. The "usefulness" of that insight may result in the reconciliation between estranged Philosophy & Science.
Prime Substance : The philosophical term ‘substance’ corresponds to the Greek ousia, which means ‘being’, transmitted via the Latin substantia, which means ‘something that stands under or grounds things’. . . .
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/substance/
Prime matter is matter with no substantial form of its own
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hylomorphism
* Note 3 -- Aristotle's "Prime Substance" and Spinoza's "Universal Substance" are what I call "Enformation" -- the power to give form to the formless. One aspect is "Energy".
Energy :
Scientists define “energy” as the ability to do work, but don't know what energy is. They assume it's an eternal causative force that existed prior to the Big Bang, along with mathematical laws. Energy is a positive or negative relationship between things, and physical Laws are limitations on the push & pull of those forces. So, all they know is what Energy does, which is to transform material objects in various ways. Energy itself is amorphous & immaterial. So if you reduce energy to its essence of information, it seems more akin to mind than matter.
http://blog-glossary.enformationism.info/page8.html
Enformationism :
A philosophical worldview or belief system grounded on the 20th century discovery that Information, rather than Matter, is the fundamental substance of everything in the universe. It is intended to be the 21st century successor to ancient Materialism. An Update from Bronze Age to Information Age. It's a Theory of Everything that covers, not just matter & energy, but also Life & Mind & Love.
http://blog-glossary.enformationism.info/page8.html
Re: TPF : Quantum Philosophy
Good point. However, should ectoplasm be detected and analyzed in a laboratory your perspective could have merit. — jgill
Ironically, something similar to "Ectoplasm" and "Spiritual Energy" has been detected and analyzed, not in chemical or biological labs, but in modern computers : Information Processors. However, it's not what psychics and mediums think it is. Computer data is Information, and Energy is enformation. It's the same fundamental stuff that "Virtual Particles" are made of. But it's not supernatural; it's not some ghostly goo, or green slime. It's merely the mundane mathematical relationship that powers Thermodynamics.
Religious believers were quick to pick-up on the parallels between Quantum Science and Spiritualism. But Atheist scientists are now getting on board, and writing books on Physics & Metaphysics, risking ridicule from their peers. Theists and Atheists can adapt "Information" to their disparate needs. But believing in Ectoplasm doesn't prove the existence of ghosts.
Ectoplasm : (from the Greek ektos, meaning "outside", and plasma, meaning "something formed or molded") is a term used in spiritualism to denote a substance or spiritual energy "exteriorized" by physical mediums.
Ironically, something similar to "Ectoplasm" and "Spiritual Energy" has been detected and analyzed, not in chemical or biological labs, but in modern computers : Information Processors. However, it's not what psychics and mediums think it is. Computer data is Information, and Energy is enformation. It's the same fundamental stuff that "Virtual Particles" are made of. But it's not supernatural; it's not some ghostly goo, or green slime. It's merely the mundane mathematical relationship that powers Thermodynamics.
Religious believers were quick to pick-up on the parallels between Quantum Science and Spiritualism. But Atheist scientists are now getting on board, and writing books on Physics & Metaphysics, risking ridicule from their peers. Theists and Atheists can adapt "Information" to their disparate needs. But believing in Ectoplasm doesn't prove the existence of ghosts.
Ectoplasm : (from the Greek ektos, meaning "outside", and plasma, meaning "something formed or molded") is a term used in spiritualism to denote a substance or spiritual energy "exteriorized" by physical mediums.
Re: TPF : Quantum Philosophy
Meta-physics refers to the things we conceive with the eye of the mind. — Gnomon
You wrote this. Your definition. Your words. Verbatim. Please don't deny this, because even the reference is there that it was penned by you.
I assert that this definition includes both quantum mechanics and the reason and rationale behind witch burning. I proved it. Now it's your turn to prove I made a mistake in the proof. — god must be atheist
Ouch! It hurts when you throw my words back in my face. But, I cannot deny that I wrote those words. So, I stand by them.
However, where in those quoted words does it say anything about "witch burning" or "sheer fantasy", "disproved fiction" and "intentional fraud".. Show me any of those words in my post, and I'll admit that you have proven your false accusation. That's your "assertion" not mine. And ad hominem accusations are not philosophical proof of anything. Maybe you can create a syllogism that leads from belief in Mental "Phenomena" to human atrocities of Faith. That would only prove that your personal conception of Metaphysics is warped by your animus concerning Religion & Magic & Ghosts.
I'm not as gullible as you think. I have subscribed to Skeptical Enquirer and Skeptic magazine and Scientific American magazine for over 35 years. So, I know about "sheer fantasy", "disproved fiction" and "intentional fraud". And I know just enough about Quantum Physics to be dangerous . . . to Materialists and Spiritualists. FYI, here's the last line of my glossary definition of "Meta-Physics" : I use a hyphen in the spelling to indicate that I am not talking about Ghosts and Magic, but about Ontology (science of being). Can you find any "witch burning" in that quote?
I usually find your comments on this forum to be calm and rational. But you are completely missing the point of my comments on Quantum Theory and Philosophy. And your "witch burning" accusations sound more like fearful medieval villagers bearing torches. Are you going to accuse me of consorting with Satan next? Apparently, your faith in Materialism is strong. So, You are putting meanings in my words that are not in my mind. BTW, did you interpret "mind's eye" as the Hindu "third eye"? I was referring to Reason & Imagination, which can see things that are not. Do you think Einstein actually saw the world stretching as he rode on a light beam?
"Imagination is more important than knowledge. For knowledge is limited, whereas imagination embraces the entire world, stimulating progress, giving birth to evolution." ___Einstein
Concepts in Metaphysics : Topics of metaphysical investigation include existence, objects and their properties, space and time, cause and effect, and possibility.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category: ... etaphysics
Note : how many of those categories are physical objects that can be studied under a microscope? And how many can you see with the "eye of the body"? Is Space-Time a perceivable material object or an invisible mental metaphor?
Putting words into someone's mouth: a logical fallacy? ... I've always been told that it is giving your opponents worst argument so that you can defeat it easily, ...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk%3ALogical_fallacy
Here's another quote for you to parse :
Enformationism : a worldview or belief system, grounded in the assumption that mundane Information, not Matter, is the basic substance of everything in the universe. It is intended to be a successor to the 19th century paradigm of Materialism, and to the ancient worldview of Spiritualism.
http://enformationism.info/enformationi ... lcome.html
Evidence from 21st century science follows . . . .
You wrote this. Your definition. Your words. Verbatim. Please don't deny this, because even the reference is there that it was penned by you.
I assert that this definition includes both quantum mechanics and the reason and rationale behind witch burning. I proved it. Now it's your turn to prove I made a mistake in the proof. — god must be atheist
Ouch! It hurts when you throw my words back in my face. But, I cannot deny that I wrote those words. So, I stand by them.
However, where in those quoted words does it say anything about "witch burning" or "sheer fantasy", "disproved fiction" and "intentional fraud".. Show me any of those words in my post, and I'll admit that you have proven your false accusation. That's your "assertion" not mine. And ad hominem accusations are not philosophical proof of anything. Maybe you can create a syllogism that leads from belief in Mental "Phenomena" to human atrocities of Faith. That would only prove that your personal conception of Metaphysics is warped by your animus concerning Religion & Magic & Ghosts.
I'm not as gullible as you think. I have subscribed to Skeptical Enquirer and Skeptic magazine and Scientific American magazine for over 35 years. So, I know about "sheer fantasy", "disproved fiction" and "intentional fraud". And I know just enough about Quantum Physics to be dangerous . . . to Materialists and Spiritualists. FYI, here's the last line of my glossary definition of "Meta-Physics" : I use a hyphen in the spelling to indicate that I am not talking about Ghosts and Magic, but about Ontology (science of being). Can you find any "witch burning" in that quote?
I usually find your comments on this forum to be calm and rational. But you are completely missing the point of my comments on Quantum Theory and Philosophy. And your "witch burning" accusations sound more like fearful medieval villagers bearing torches. Are you going to accuse me of consorting with Satan next? Apparently, your faith in Materialism is strong. So, You are putting meanings in my words that are not in my mind. BTW, did you interpret "mind's eye" as the Hindu "third eye"? I was referring to Reason & Imagination, which can see things that are not. Do you think Einstein actually saw the world stretching as he rode on a light beam?
"Imagination is more important than knowledge. For knowledge is limited, whereas imagination embraces the entire world, stimulating progress, giving birth to evolution." ___Einstein
Concepts in Metaphysics : Topics of metaphysical investigation include existence, objects and their properties, space and time, cause and effect, and possibility.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category: ... etaphysics
Note : how many of those categories are physical objects that can be studied under a microscope? And how many can you see with the "eye of the body"? Is Space-Time a perceivable material object or an invisible mental metaphor?
Putting words into someone's mouth: a logical fallacy? ... I've always been told that it is giving your opponents worst argument so that you can defeat it easily, ...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk%3ALogical_fallacy
Here's another quote for you to parse :
Enformationism : a worldview or belief system, grounded in the assumption that mundane Information, not Matter, is the basic substance of everything in the universe. It is intended to be a successor to the 19th century paradigm of Materialism, and to the ancient worldview of Spiritualism.
http://enformationism.info/enformationi ... lcome.html
Evidence from 21st century science follows . . . .
Re: TPF : Quantum Philosophy
Spiritual energy is a quantum fluctuation? This is similar to ectoplasm? This sounds a bit like quantum mysticism. — jgill
No. That's not even close to what I said. I'm simply offering my opinion : that the phenomena ancient sages explained in terms of "Spirit" is now explained in terms of "Energy". But Energy can now be explained in terms of "Information" and "Enformation". Hence, Information can be a physical cause (verb -- "to enform"). But, before Shannon, that same word referred only to non-quantifiable meta-physical knowledge in the mind (noun -- "fact") . So now, most scientists think of "information" in quantifiable physical terms as "negentropy" (i.e energy). And they forget that it originally referred to qualitative Ideas in a Mind.
That's not "quantum mysticism", it's just Information Theory. But, since Information/Energy is an invisible Cause in the natural world, it serves the same causal function as ancient notions of Spirit, Soul, Chi, Ghosts, Ectoplasm. Since Atheists tend to be offended by such "forbidden" words, they try to pin the "Mystic" label on me --- like holding a silver cross to defend against a vampire. But I'm neither an Atheist, nor a Theist, nor a Vampire, nor a Mystic. So, I'm comfortable with whatever terminology suits the application. I think the next generation of informed people will be more familiar, and comfortable, with the dual roles of Information : Matter stuff, and Mind stuff.
The mass-energy-information equivalence principle : https://aip.scitation.org/doi/full/10.1063/1.5123794.
Information (quality) : noun. knowledge communicated or received concerning a particular fact or circumstance; news.
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/information
Information (quantity) : Shannon defined the quantity of information produced by a source--for example, the quantity in a message--by a formula similar to the equation that defines thermodynamic entropy in physics.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/arti ... n-founder/
No. That's not even close to what I said. I'm simply offering my opinion : that the phenomena ancient sages explained in terms of "Spirit" is now explained in terms of "Energy". But Energy can now be explained in terms of "Information" and "Enformation". Hence, Information can be a physical cause (verb -- "to enform"). But, before Shannon, that same word referred only to non-quantifiable meta-physical knowledge in the mind (noun -- "fact") . So now, most scientists think of "information" in quantifiable physical terms as "negentropy" (i.e energy). And they forget that it originally referred to qualitative Ideas in a Mind.
That's not "quantum mysticism", it's just Information Theory. But, since Information/Energy is an invisible Cause in the natural world, it serves the same causal function as ancient notions of Spirit, Soul, Chi, Ghosts, Ectoplasm. Since Atheists tend to be offended by such "forbidden" words, they try to pin the "Mystic" label on me --- like holding a silver cross to defend against a vampire. But I'm neither an Atheist, nor a Theist, nor a Vampire, nor a Mystic. So, I'm comfortable with whatever terminology suits the application. I think the next generation of informed people will be more familiar, and comfortable, with the dual roles of Information : Matter stuff, and Mind stuff.
The mass-energy-information equivalence principle : https://aip.scitation.org/doi/full/10.1063/1.5123794.
Information (quality) : noun. knowledge communicated or received concerning a particular fact or circumstance; news.
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/information
Information (quantity) : Shannon defined the quantity of information produced by a source--for example, the quantity in a message--by a formula similar to the equation that defines thermodynamic entropy in physics.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/arti ... n-founder/
Re: TPF : Quantum Philosophy
Wiki: In physics, a virtual particle is a transient quantum fluctuation
Admittedly, you did say "something similar" to spiritual energy, so that lets you off the hook. — jgill
Thanks, but I wasn't biting anyway.
Do virtual particles actually physically exist? : Thus virtual particles exist only in the mathematics of the model used to describe the measurements of real particles . To coin a word, virtual particles are particlemorphic , having a form like particle but not a particle.
https://physics.stackexchange.com/quest ... ally-exist
Note 1 -- Is an "unreal", "metaphysical" [my words] virtual particle similar to a Platonic Form?
Virtual Particle or Disturbance? : " . . .A virtual particle is not a particle at all. It refers precisely to a disturbance in a field that is not a particle. A particle is a nice, regular ripple in a field, one that can travel smoothly and effortlessly through space, like a clear tone of a bell moving through the air. A “virtual particle”, generally, is a disturbance in a field that will never be found on its own, but instead is something that is caused by the presence of other particles, often of other fields.. . ." https://profmattstrassler.com/articles- ... -are-they/
Note 2 -- is a "disturbance in a field" similar to a "disturbance in the Force"? Is "The Force" something like Spiritual Energy?
Quantum Fluctuation : Quantum fluctuation is the temporary appearance of energetic particles out of nothing, as allowed by the Uncertainty Principle.
https://universe-review.ca/R03-01-quantumflu.htm
Note 3 -- Some Cosmologists theorize that our world was created-out-of-nothing due to a Quantum Fluctuation. Does that sound like Magic to you? And you think I'm a Mystic?
Virtual : The definition of virtual is something that exists in the mind, exists in essence but not in fact or created by a computer. An example of virtual is an imaginary friend.
Note 4 -- Why did Physicists call those " transient disturbances" by the ghostly term "virtual"? Is a Virtual Particle like an imaginary friend? Do ghost-hunters search for "transient disturbances"? I'm not making this stuff up. I'm quoting the words of Atheist Physicists.
Note 5 -- Mundane natural "Information" exists in the Mind, and in Matter. Yes?
Note 6 -- In view of all this spooky scientific language, do you now agree that Quantum Theory is dabbling in Philosophy --- in Meta-physics? And getting dangerously close to Mysticism.
Admittedly, you did say "something similar" to spiritual energy, so that lets you off the hook. — jgill
Thanks, but I wasn't biting anyway.
Do virtual particles actually physically exist? : Thus virtual particles exist only in the mathematics of the model used to describe the measurements of real particles . To coin a word, virtual particles are particlemorphic , having a form like particle but not a particle.
https://physics.stackexchange.com/quest ... ally-exist
Note 1 -- Is an "unreal", "metaphysical" [my words] virtual particle similar to a Platonic Form?
Virtual Particle or Disturbance? : " . . .A virtual particle is not a particle at all. It refers precisely to a disturbance in a field that is not a particle. A particle is a nice, regular ripple in a field, one that can travel smoothly and effortlessly through space, like a clear tone of a bell moving through the air. A “virtual particle”, generally, is a disturbance in a field that will never be found on its own, but instead is something that is caused by the presence of other particles, often of other fields.. . ." https://profmattstrassler.com/articles- ... -are-they/
Note 2 -- is a "disturbance in a field" similar to a "disturbance in the Force"? Is "The Force" something like Spiritual Energy?
Quantum Fluctuation : Quantum fluctuation is the temporary appearance of energetic particles out of nothing, as allowed by the Uncertainty Principle.
https://universe-review.ca/R03-01-quantumflu.htm
Note 3 -- Some Cosmologists theorize that our world was created-out-of-nothing due to a Quantum Fluctuation. Does that sound like Magic to you? And you think I'm a Mystic?
Virtual : The definition of virtual is something that exists in the mind, exists in essence but not in fact or created by a computer. An example of virtual is an imaginary friend.
Note 4 -- Why did Physicists call those " transient disturbances" by the ghostly term "virtual"? Is a Virtual Particle like an imaginary friend? Do ghost-hunters search for "transient disturbances"? I'm not making this stuff up. I'm quoting the words of Atheist Physicists.
Note 5 -- Mundane natural "Information" exists in the Mind, and in Matter. Yes?
Note 6 -- In view of all this spooky scientific language, do you now agree that Quantum Theory is dabbling in Philosophy --- in Meta-physics? And getting dangerously close to Mysticism.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 23 guests