Science Forums 2

[arkain101]

No, its entirely scientific, but there is mystery meeting mechanistic now in science.

In a blunt way, I am pointing out, that kickassclown's beef is a righteous beef.

I believe this is so, because entry level science teaches you a view of the world that is purely is mechanistic (mechanical like).

Although the equations show there is laws that uphold, this does not exclude other avenues.

For example.

There is laws of newtonian truth.

There is laws of Einsteinian truth.

There is laws of quantum field truth.

My most important point is that, with the mind removed, there is theoretically only one level of truth, and it must be somewhere in the reaches of the core basics of reality, which I propose is in the quantum realm.

All other sciences work with compound interactions, our mind combines a series of individual yet similar events (singular frames) and paints a concept on them.

Such as a basket ball is orange, and round, and pretty well holding still. The model of the atoms in the ball is absolutely nothing like the model of the atom in a text book and infact it isnt even a comprehensible model. Atoms are like temporary states. An electron changes orbits but it doesnt move from orbit to orbit the cloud so to speak becomes orbit to orbit, no space, it just instantly becomes a new state, which is wave-like, and particle like, but also neither, or both.

So, I am daring to say you can not exclude the mind from physics, since up to this date all physics has yet studied is patterns the mind puts together.

You can't exclude mind from physics. I am not suggesting metaphysical, I am saying, think outside of sciences current box, for the very reasons I explained, science's box is and has been the study of the mind.

The fact light is the same speed to each individual observer, regardless of the speed either is going, is a powerful suggestion that, the mind is intwined with your reality and your physics. That is, your universe is unique and seperate to mine, for as long as special relativity stands up to its postulates.

For a simple example. If you can observe from space my clock to run slower than yours, while my clock runs the same as usual and physics laws uphold, then our universes are not in direct connection, they include mental aspects along side physical aspects. It comes down to relativeness, and a duality between matter and mind.

So, when I read kickassclown, saying, how should I be limited to the suggestions of possibilites that science is currently able to give, and why should I not investigate out of this box? Then I think as we re-read his thread, we can get his inquiry.

It's because he and I have dicussed our comman view on science and its range from outside of the box that this followup, and sort of introduction is I think required to begin grasping the scientificly catagorized methods being discussed.