Location: Mumbai, Maharashtra
Hmm, well similar idea, but calling and describing it as god, only makes the understanding vague due to the different types of theism, which makes what you trying to say sound nonsensical, as the majority of perception is gods = supernatural deities, and blending supernatural into science, just screws up " How things work", where it should be the other way round, dissecting what people assume is supernatural , and split the natural explanations from the delusions. yes I mention infinite dimensions. the reason is ,lets say the extraterrestrial you you assume to be multidimensional, and they had the same understanding of the universe as the people on this planet who have almost the same social structure beliefs what have you. They would be assuming that you are a multidimensional extraterrestrial. Technology would allow one to travel through these spectrum of infinite dimensions which most cases people here consider science fiction more than science fact.
I noticed during the above 'fractal zoom', that the recursion passed though 'julian sets' many times. 'Julian Sets' can be computed via the same underlying algorithm as used for the Mandelbrot set, but you pick off a point in the complex plane that appears to be stable under recursion, and use it as a 'seed'. Testing each complutaion during recursion to see if it still remains stable(not diverging to infinity). If that next computation is stable it is drawn to the graphic.
I puttered with complex numbers and the Mandelbrot/Julian sets early 1990's with a monograph submitted for publication at OSU.
@ɐuɐz ǝllǝıuɐp Well, this is only if you assume that there is no such thing as the "supernatural." There is a perspective in which the supernatural can be described in terms of these higher dimensions as espoused by M-theorists.
For instance, and I've posted this on another thread maybe you've read it, if you refer to Arthur C. Clarke's third law of prediction: "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic," then you can kind of get an idea how this works. So, you see, if you hypothesize a technology with access to one spatial dimension higher, then suddenly all the mysteries of the supernatural or magic become trivial. They are easily done. Locked boxes are opened; future events are discerned; lost objects are found. This sort of thing becomes quite the ordinary run of things if we hypothesize dimensions hidden from ordinary experience.
There's a concept in Kurt Vonnegut's book "Slaughterhouse-Five" where he depicts extraterrestrials as what he calls Tralfamadorians, they perceive in the 4th dimension. They have access to view any point in the past, present or future, but possess no free will because as they see it, all points in time are fixed. So, it's a kind of Eternalism, a block universe, and they're perfectly placid in their fatalism.
What I mean that the exraterrestrial may beyond the vicissitudes of three-dimensional space is not the mundane description you seem to give it, that they perhaps reside in these higher dimensions to which we cannot perceive.
Here's an interesting read:
DMT as a key to a higher dimensional self
@James Cox I've always found the Julia sets to be very interesting in that they've always closely resembled the fractals seen in psilocybin and DMT experiences. The art work of Alex Grey is a good example of this. It's interesting to not, too, that the looms of the brain itself are fractal.
The truth is I am not assuming, it is logically evident that the supernatural does not exist , for me believing in the supernatural is the same in believing that energy creates substance, and falining to understand that energy is the vibration, the sound, the motion of stuff, creating geometric patterns and arrangements making larger stuff.. through the fractal of existence. Defining something as being supernatural is a lazy way of signing off one's lack of understanding and curiosity to understand and know to believe a lie on the basis of faith.
Interesting theories how you understand dimensions, but i personally dissagree with the perception, because it is a finite understaniding of something thats infinite, overlapping interacting etc.
Everyone's own time is relative to ones self, the further away from the Earth you go (especially going faster than lightspeed) excluding space warping and wormhole usage , the more noticeable its queerness becomes.
DMT is only a "program" that runs in your operating system "consciousness" because it changes direction of your normal circuit processing in the brain to be able to visualize the fractal nature or even experience it of the universe, it does not make you multidimensional, and like any drug or to much of anything, to much of it can be harmfull to your brain, and only to be used when necessary. I take weed, only when I need it, as it should be treated like a medicine.
My point is that the supernatural, from perspective, as in the example I gave of a technology that was able to work from one spatial dimension higher, is then seen as trivial. It becomes no mystery as to how the "supernatural" can become indistinguishable from this type of technology.
There is such concepts such as "quantum consciousness" where theoretical physicists have proposed that consciousness cannot be explain unless you include quantum mechanical phenomena that is intertwined with the "11-dimensions" of M-Theory.
Of those who've experienced DMT by injection or by smoking it or through imbibing it through the form of ayahuasca, many people often describe the experience with such phrases and terms as "fourth dimensional" or "a glimpse into a higher dimension." So, I think it's a bit disingenuous to say that we aren't multidimensional. I don't think anyone could truly prove this one way or the other. Most typical atheists that Dawkins describes as "agnostic atheist" do not say that God does not, in fact, exist, they instead say that it's highly unlikely that God does exist. In that same vein, how could one make a statement like that about human beings not being "multidimensional"? I believe to assume that there is no such thing would be a finite view, not the broader perspective.
While I agree that there are substances that are harmful to the brain, usually these substances are things like cocaine, heroin, alcohol, etc. Psychedelics such as DMT are a little different being that DMT is already naturally present in the brain. There has been studies with the religious group of South America, the Santo Daime church, which upheld the use of ayahuasca or "hoasca," the DMT-containing religious drink, as a religious right of the members of the church. People who've used this stuff throughout their life have been examined to be perfectly healthy even after years of using ayahuasca.
Scientific Investigation of Ayahuasca
I guess I tend to stay 'close to home' in speculations, for fear that I begin to believe my bubbles of supposition, or create an obsession that compromises my life.
A few folks here might have seen the movie 'PI' about nine years ago, where the main character is a mathematician in search of a number/procedure for deep prediction. In the end, his life takes on a risky statis. Like religion, mathematics might promise certainty, if not power, but does not always deliver. In a way 'insight' is not 'power', but that insight is conditioned upon our tools...
I expect that much of 'magic' does not need access to any higher deminsions, just an insight into 'method'. If you can find no insight into how a 'trick' is done, you might be tempted to suppose some wuwu underlying process, but really you might be creativity challenged! My family used to have a very early copy of the Encyclopedia Britanica, early 40's I think. I remember as a kid reading the entrys concerning 'magic', with the writer mentioning that electricity must be involved! Now, for the nieve, it has become quantum mechanics or M-theory. Maybe in time we will find our honesty and decide that 'magic' is just good slite of hand, with a dose of creativity for spice!
Join Think Atheist
Welcome toThink Atheist
Get Started Nowor Sign In
Or sign in with:
Started by Belle Rose in Small Talk. Last reply by Simon Paynton 5 minutes ago.
Started by Davis Goodman in Small Talk. Last reply by Jake LaFort 19 hours ago.
Started by Belle Rose in Small Talk. Last reply by Simon Paynton on Monday.
Started by Stephen in Society. Last reply by Daniel W. on Sunday.
Started by Stephen in Small Talk. Last reply by Daniel W. on Sunday.
Sunday School October 23rd 2016
Sunday School October 16th 2016
Sunday School October 9th 2016
Posted by Noon Alif on October 25, 2016 at 3:30pm
Posted by Brad Snowder on October 22, 2016 at 4:10pm
Computer Help Forums
© 2016 Created by umar.
Report an Issue |
Terms of Service
Please check your browser settings or contact your system administrator.