Physics, Metaphysics & the Consciousness Connection 2 of 18
Physicist and consciousness researcher, Thomas Campbell, Discusses the nature of reality in terms of consciousness — this video logically and scientifically explains the normal and the paranormal, mind and matter, physics and metaphysics, philosophy and theology.
Tags: Connection, Consciousness, Metaphysics, Physics
June 24th, 2010 at 8:47 am
The electron and the electromagnetic waves are physical reality
Electron produces electromagnetic waves
There isnt electromagnetic field / waves without electron
The brain produces some kind of electromagnetic waves
The source of these electromagnetic waves must be an electron
Consciousness is also physical reality, some kind of
electromagnetic waves ( Electroencephalography)
Every thought has a frequency
The source of the consciousness must be an electron
Sadovnik Socratus
June 24th, 2010 at 9:35 am
In order to understand what Mr. Campbell tries to explain in 18 videos with lots of contradictions, I suggest you better see Chuck Hillig, THE MEANING OF LIFE, in youtube, and with that you will understand everything in just 13 minutes. Save your time.
June 24th, 2010 at 9:48 am
I AM GOD too.
June 24th, 2010 at 10:02 am
checkout 12 around 1 on crystalinks(.)com its a pretty cool site.
June 24th, 2010 at 10:33 am
Hello guys, sorry 4 my bad English, but please start thinking:
We are all “One” World? All religions are wrong?
Why not go to the “new world order” bullshit right the way?? there is the place to be for those Esoterical who pray to the devil!
June 24th, 2010 at 10:37 am
I AM GOD
June 24th, 2010 at 10:45 am
Exactly. Thats why we will never have proof of the existence of God, because you can only check if it is real if you decide to experience in your own reality, the reality of your consciousness.
June 24th, 2010 at 11:14 am
If we are all part if something bigger (which we are). then when can we assume all life might have originated from one being?
June 24th, 2010 at 11:57 am
You can never describe a large system with information that”s inside the sub system.
this is the reason you cant Explain god???
June 24th, 2010 at 12:23 pm
Amen yea its the case but the non noing can be forgiven perhaps –as we are all simply guessing in normative states of critical analysis about realms that are not currently here or at least open to critical analysis by monkeys in the 3-4 dimension. Currently science says we have what
about 11 dimensions now? Was alot less than that when i was in school– The masters
of old talk about infinite dimensions and so do the string people. I have no problem cutting these teachers sum slack.
June 24th, 2010 at 12:39 pm
The energy necessary to recover lost energy in a closed system will always be capable of producing more work than the energy we are trying to recover. ……..The energy needed to create work will always be greater than the work created thus a net energy loss is unavoidable? Is that what u meant?
June 24th, 2010 at 12:54 pm
Or another view could be quantum entanglement if the data in the larger set was ever put together in the first place then a subset would of physical necessity have to have all the data points of the larger set regardless of when the larger and smaller were created in time as then the time slot would just be objectively real to a subjective viewer caught in a observational reference point–
June 24th, 2010 at 1:19 pm
Yes i see ur point and in full disclosure I did not view the entire lecture so missed his alluding. But if we are strictly talking about consciousness in the ultimate sense of its awarness of self then the axiom remains consistent. The problem is more semantic in that just because most of us cannot see the large in the small does not mean that it is not there…..
June 24th, 2010 at 1:37 pm
@fireopalmo …A point of awareness privy to the information of the more inclusive set , will of course be seeing the BIG picture….a more complete understanding is possible…….it would be like comparing the worldview of a worker doing his individual labors on a huge job sit…..and that of someone with access to the plans and or a view from an airplane.
June 24th, 2010 at 2:21 pm
@fireopalmo ….Your assessment is essentially correct, but think of it in the following way. Think of it as information.The subset has less information, and any conclusion based on its information will be limited relative to one made with access to the information of the higher order or greater set. That is what the professor is alluding to. Remember, he is talking about consciousness and knowledge of a plan or operation.
June 24th, 2010 at 10:02 am
[...] The Philosophers Chair » Blog Archive » Physics, Metaphysics & the Co… [...]
June 24th, 2010 at 3:05 pm
i agree.
June 24th, 2010 at 3:18 pm
Closed systems are artificial contrivances and thus do follow those rules yes.
June 24th, 2010 at 3:41 pm
Hmm 1 min 30 to 1 min forty He says basically um The subsystem cannot no the real nature of the Whole system cuz its but a part and yes this does make intuitive sense thou completely untrue: As above so below- In the smallest lies the greatest and the reverse and inverse is also true. The universe is holographic and this couterintuition is sadly the case.
June 24th, 2010 at 4:28 pm
morphine? XDD
June 24th, 2010 at 5:17 pm
why would u wanna break ure toe .lol.
June 24th, 2010 at 5:56 pm
Ultimately, when speaking of a closed system , disorder is the outcome simply because the energy loss(heat) will always be LESS than the amount of energy necessary to Recover that lost energy. To say it another way we can speak of it in terms of work. The energy necessary to recover lost energy in a closed system will always be capable of producing more work than the energy we are trying to recover. Thus, the system must eventually cease to function as it had. Any boos , hisses,yeas, nays?
June 24th, 2010 at 6:32 pm
Entropy can only be specified for a specific system. In this simple example, the water was defined as the system — thus, the jug, by definition, was not part of the system. The example was only about the entropy of the water.
June 24th, 2010 at 6:54 pm
I find this lecture very interesting, and since I don”t know much about this and the water example gave me a good understanding about entropy, can you provide another example that explains it more clearly? and why the jug is not relevant?
June 24th, 2010 at 7:05 pm
The example was fine. His vision was impaired.
The ordered state of the water molecules included energy to create and maintain the form. That energy is available to do work. (Forget about efficiency of transformation.) Once that energy has been used up to evaporate or otherwise displace the water molecules, it is no longer available to do other work.
That is why the form is secondary to the energy that goes into making it.
Entropy is at the low end of the consciousness scale but is fundamental.
June 24th, 2010 at 7:24 pm
Entropy many of those who say they know what it is, only have a very vague perception without any deeper insight – it”s not taught in schools to a larger extend. Actually, there is no general agreement among scientists either and that may just be the cause why many teachers do not want to go too deep into the subject – they are unsure themselves.
June 24th, 2010 at 3:43 pm
[...] The Philosophers Chair » Blog Archive » Physics, Metaphysics & the … [...]
June 24th, 2010 at 10:12 pm
[...] The Philosophers Chair » Blog Archive » Physics, Metaphysics & the … [...]
June 25th, 2010 at 1:42 am
[...] The Philosophers Chair » Blog Archive » Physics, Metaphysics & the Co… [...]
July 19th, 2011 at 12:39 pm
You have a good deal of excellent information throughout this document. Im opting-in to your rss feed.
July 26th, 2011 at 8:47 pm
I simply want to mention I am just very new to blogging and absolutely liked this page. Probably I’m likely to bookmark your site . You amazingly have perfect posts. Thanks a bunch for revealing your website.
August 8th, 2011 at 8:37 pm
If you”re still on the fence: grab your favorite earphones, head down to a Best Buy and ask to plug them into a Zune then an iPod and see which one sounds better to you, and which interface makes you smile more. Then you”ll know which is right for you.
August 24th, 2011 at 7:39 pm
dJJeYZ ustaugizaich, [url= [link=