Re: virus: PHY/PHIL: Holographic Universe

don roh (gomorrah@flash.net)
Fri, 14 Nov 1997 18:26:13 -0700


--------------9944F0E9B29F29ACD8E62A56
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Christopher Whipple wrote:

> > David Talbot wrote a book called "The Holographic Universe". the premise
> > was the universe is only a holographic projection (us included). He
> > started this premise by suggesting that consciousness was also a
> > holographic projecion of the mind. I think some of us see consciousness
> > as software running on hardware (the brain). The physical aspects of the
> > mind are subject to the physical descriptions that physics has used,
> > thus far. The software aspect however, is probably a lot more than just
> > the mass of neurons that it runs on. Consciousness is a good example of
> > something that is more than the sum of it's parts. I don't think any of
> > us can explain, in an accurate and objective manner, where a "new' idea
> > comes from. Because of this lack of information, to make an assumption
> > that concepts of thought can be mapped to descriptions in physics is a
> > huge leap without support. So far, we can find where things are
> > happening in the mind, and the chemicals that are responsible for
> > certain mental processes, but we cannot yet tell where the line between
> > electro-chemical action, and consciousness is drawn. Lack of evidence
> > means no theory. Now, if you want to say that "maybe" it works this way,
> > and can think of a way to test this idea, I'm all for that, but i feel
> > is is premature to go any further than "maybe". If we permit
> > unsupportable claims to reach the point of truth, than I am guilty of my
> > own sin of avoiding self-deception.
> >
> >
> > Sodom
> >
>
> I apologize for the lateness of this reply, my net access has been
> sporadic at best due to the fact that they're laying the new fiber at my
> campus.
>
> The Holographic Universe is indeed a wonderful book, however I think it
> was Michael Talbot who wrote it instead of David... It deals with the
> concepts of the mind and the entire universe acting in the manner of a
> computer with the newest holographic or multi-phase technology. Sometime
> I'll write up a TECH response (when I have the time) on just how this new
> form of technology works...along with the rumors of a new HD technology
> coming out of Rochester NY in time for the new year.
>
> To sum things up quickly... actually, things can't be summed up quickly
> with this book. Dealings in metaphysics, unexplained phenomena,
> philosophy and the inner working of the human mind are all toyed with in
> this book - a wonderful read if you can get around to it.

If you enjoyed reading the Talbot book, try reading the man that inspired
Talbot, world class physicist David Bohm. In Wholeness and the Implicate
order, Bohm ties together ideas of consciousness and psychology with with the
physical sciences very well. Bohm is considered one of the greatest quantum
physicists of our time. Remember, quantum physics paved the road for the
microprocessor and is no way a fringe or merely theoretical science. Any ways,
it a good book.

i.e. from the introduction.

"what is the relationship of thinking to reality. As careful attention shows,
thought itself is in the actual process of movement.
that is to say , one can feel a sense of flow in the 'stream of conciseness'
not dissimilar to the sense of flow in the movement
of matter in general. May not thought itself thus be apart of reality as a
whole? but then, what could it mean for one part of reality to 'know'
another, and to what extent would this be possible. Does the content of
thought merely give us abstract and simplified 'snapshots' of reality, or can
it go further, somehow to grasp the very essence of the living movement that
we sense in actual experience?"

Although, parts of the book are beyond me mathmatically, I felt the book as a
whole was very good.

gomorrah

>
>
> It changed the way I looked at things in that it offered a viable solution
> to so many of the things I had problems believing in - of course, any
> idea presented in a rational and logical manner would most likely have the
> same effect. You be the judge...
>
> ::byteboy
> ::http://www.teknopia.org/byteboy

--------------9944F0E9B29F29ACD8E62A56
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

 

Christopher Whipple wrote:

> David Talbot wrote a book called "The Holographic Universe". the premise
> was the universe is only a holographic projection (us included). He
> started this premise by suggesting that consciousness was also a
> holographic projecion of the mind. I think some of us see consciousness
> as software running on hardware (the brain). The physical aspects of the
> mind are subject to the physical descriptions that physics has used,
> thus far. The software aspect however, is probably a lot more than just
> the mass of neurons that it runs on. Consciousness is a good example of
> something that is more than the sum of it's parts. I don't think any of
> us can explain, in an accurate and objective manner, where a "new' idea
> comes from. Because of this lack of information, to make an assumption
> that concepts of thought can be mapped to descriptions in physics is a
> huge leap without support. So far, we can find where things are
> happening in the mind, and the chemicals that are responsible for
> certain mental processes, but we cannot yet tell where the line between
> electro-chemical action, and consciousness is drawn. Lack of evidence
> means no theory. Now, if you want to say that "maybe" it works this way,
> and can think of a way to test this idea, I'm all for that, but i feel
> is is premature to go any further than "maybe". If we permit
> unsupportable claims to reach the point of truth, than I am guilty of my
> own sin of avoiding self-deception.
>
>
> Sodom
>

I apologize for the lateness of this reply,  my net access has been
sporadic at best due to the fact that they're laying the new fiber at my
campus.

The Holographic Universe is indeed a wonderful book,  however I think it
was Michael Talbot who wrote it instead of David...  It deals with the
concepts of the mind and the entire universe acting in the manner of a
computer with the newest holographic or multi-phase technology.  Sometime
I'll write up a TECH response (when I have the time) on just how this new
form of technology works...along with the rumors of a new HD technology
coming out of Rochester NY in time for the new year.

To sum things up quickly... actually,  things can't be summed up quickly
with this book.  Dealings in metaphysics, unexplained phenomena,
philosophy and the inner working of the human mind are all toyed with in
this book - a wonderful read if you can get around to it.

If you enjoyed reading the Talbot book, try reading the man that inspired Talbot, world class physicist  David Bohm. In Wholeness and the Implicate order,  Bohm ties together ideas of consciousness and psychology with with the physical sciences very well.  Bohm is considered one of the greatest quantum physicists of our time. Remember,  quantum physics paved the road for the microprocessor and is no way a fringe or merely theoretical science. Any ways, it a good book.

i.e.  from the introduction.

"what is the relationship of thinking to reality.  As careful attention shows, thought itself is in the actual process of movement.
that is to say ,  one can feel a sense of flow in the 'stream of conciseness' not dissimilar to the sense of flow in the movement
of matter in general.  May not thought itself thus be apart of reality as a whole?  but then, what could it mean for one part of reality to 'know' another, and to what extent would this be possible.  Does the content of thought merely give us abstract and simplified 'snapshots' of reality, or can it go further, somehow to grasp the very essence of the living movement that we sense in actual experience?"

Although, parts of the book are beyond me mathmatically, I felt the book as a whole was very good.

gomorrah

 

It changed the way I looked at things in that it offered a viable solution
to so many of the things I had problems believing in - of course,  any
idea presented in a rational and logical manner would most likely have the
same effect.  You be the judge...

::byteboy
::http://www.teknopia.org/byteboy

  --------------9944F0E9B29F29ACD8E62A56--