+- Las Venturas Playground (https://forum.sa-mp.nl)
+-- Forum: Miscellaneous (https://forum.sa-mp.nl/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: General Talk (https://forum.sa-mp.nl/forum-24.html)
+--- Thread: [Serious Discussion] Religion (/thread-26936.html)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
Re: [Serious Discussion] Religion - STyL4 - 06-09-2011
oh man what an idiot. u still don't get it. Yes brown is a property of hair, but "self-collapse" is not a "property" of consciousness self-collapse IS consciousness.
u say that a self-collapsing wavefunction in his oscilloscope is not a mind. First of all I'd like to know how u got a self-collapsing wave-function in ur oscilloscope as you need special conditions to get Orch-OR. Secondly, how do u know that it doesn't.
Since collapse is ontologically identical with protophenomenal observation (meaning the same thing that occurs in both mental observation and observation by non-mental equipment), how can self-collapse not equal self-observation? Since self-observation is equal to consciousness how is self-collapse ontologically different in any way shape or form from self-observation?
thanks to Johananratz for answer, master of the theory. he's not just some engineer
ok u dont fail .. not
Re: [Serious Discussion] Religion - durrrrr - 06-09-2011
Masturbation, quantum mechanics... What else in religion topic?
Re: [Serious Discussion] Religion - Silent_Bob - 06-10-2011
(06-09-2011, 10:22 PM)durrrr link Wrote: Masturbation, quantum mechanics... What else in religion topic?
pie
Re: [Serious Discussion] Religion - 0Target0 - 06-10-2011
(06-09-2011, 10:22 PM)durrrr link Wrote: Masturbation, quantum mechanics... What else in religion topic?
Maybe even more unproven self consciousness theories?
Re: [Serious Discussion] Religion - 0Target0 - 06-10-2011
(06-09-2011, 09:43 PM)STyL4 link Wrote: oh man what an idiot. u still don't get it. Yes brown is a property of hair, but "self-collapse" is not a "property" of consciousness self-collapse IS consciousness.
u say that a self-collapsing wavefunction in his oscilloscope is not a mind. First of all I'd like to know how u got a self-collapsing wave-function in ur oscilloscope as you need special conditions to get Orch-OR. Secondly, how do u know that it doesn't.
Since collapse is ontologically identical with protophenomenal observation (meaning the same thing that occurs in both mental observation and observation by non-mental equipment), how can self-collapse not equal self-observation? Since self-observation is equal to consciousness how is self-collapse ontologically different in any way shape or form from self-observation?
thanks to Johananratz for answer, master of the theory. he's not just some engineer
ok u dont fail .. not
You are using 2 non proven theories to build a theory yourself, good game. Next time call the pope.
Re: [Serious Discussion] Religion - Tuism - 06-10-2011
(06-09-2011, 10:22 PM)durrrr link Wrote: Masturbation, quantum mechanics... What else in religion topic?
(06-10-2011, 03:21 AM)Silent_Bob link Wrote: pie
Re: [Serious Discussion] Religion - STyL4 - 06-10-2011
@0target0 nice one, FACTs. now go post mastrubation video related to religion topic, to see how clueless u are.
ORCH OR theory ftw. too bad u cant deny it (dont say u did because u didnt reply on this one, well u did like 4 times to the theory but u FAILED. badly
proved u 4 times or so), go on and watch the video shithead. ur arguments so far sucked too much and u can tell how clueless u are. the quote up there destroyed u for the 4th time. stop changing the theme because u're one of those "cuz i say so" guys, i've provided clear facts. if anyone say they arent facts then i want u to find what FACTs in here are wrong:(06-09-2011, 09:43 PM)STyL4 link Wrote: oh man what an idiot. u still don't get it. Yes brown is a property of hair, but "self-collapse" is not a "property" of consciousness self-collapse IS consciousness.
u say that a self-collapsing wavefunction in his oscilloscope is not a mind. First of all I'd like to know how u got a self-collapsing wave-function in ur oscilloscope as you need special conditions to get Orch-OR. Secondly, how do u know that it doesn't.
Since collapse is ontologically identical with protophenomenal observation (meaning the same thing that occurs in both mental observation and observation by non-mental equipment), how can self-collapse not equal self-observation? Since self-observation is equal to consciousness how is self-collapse ontologically different in any way shape or form from self-observation?
thanks to Johananratz for answer, master of the theory. he's not just some engineer
ok u dont fail .. not
stipp waiting for an answer
Re: [Serious Discussion] Religion - Maka - 06-10-2011
Dude I'm still pissed atm and can clearly say no one takes you seriously. xD
Re: [Serious Discussion] Religion - 0Target0 - 06-10-2011
(06-10-2011, 01:23 PM)STyL4 link Wrote: @0target0 nice one, FACTs. now go post mastrubation video related to religion topic, to see how clueless u are.
ORCH OR theory ftw. too bad u cant deny it (dont say u did because u didnt reply on this one, well u did like 4 times to the theory but u FAILED. badly
stipp waiting for an answer
Lol stay calm kid.
It's not up to me to disprove a theory, it's up to you to PROVE your theory, which is not proven.
Orch Or is debatable and the wrongly interpreted conclusion that a self collapsing wave function is a mind is the very own MISinterpretation of the Orch OR theory by that guy you contacted.
For the record: Roger Penrose never says that self collapsing wave functions are minds. That's what your guy says. Self collapsing wave functions are statistical probabilities. It's a function of determinacy. Therefore they are not real and therefore your god is not real.
It's like arguing with scientology or some other retarded sect.
By the way, you still need to learn what a fact is.
Re: [Serious Discussion] Religion - STyL4 - 06-10-2011
Maka u still here? this discussion does not involve u because u obviously dont know whats going on, face it
(dont say u do otherwise ur agument'd be better)0target0, i guess i reached the limit of ur "patience", gg
u even reported me for that"Therefore they are not real and therefore your god is not real."
u're doing his quantum all backwards if u think there is no real wave-like nature before collapse occurs: Dear Positivists: Who's The Quantum Mystic Now?
If there is no real probability wave then we wouldn't be seeing an interference pattern in the double-slit experiment. Also the ensemble interpretation has long been debunked.
This is from Hameroff's site directly: (Hameroff is the guy who teamed up with Penrose on Orch-OR)
Problematic Feature of Consciousness:
"Essential nature of human experience"
Possible Quantum Solutions:
"1) Wave function self collapse (Orch OR) from incompatible superposition of separated space-times;
2) Pre-consciousconscious transition;
3) Effectively instantaneous "now"(Orch OR) collapse."
"
http://www.quantumconsciousness.org/penrose-hameroff/orchor.html"
nuff said 0target0, yet another argument of urs "cuz i say so" has been proven a fail. deny more u want, u've officialy lost this debate, now go state ur own opinion because u simply can't stop, but the fact is that u're wrong. THESE UP THERE ARE FACTS. if u deny them, u deny science therefore u can't say NOTHING about Religion, NOTHING about this debate itself.
Johananratz truly is a scientists, not to mention his public debates... he's master at this, engineers cant stop him.