Quote:
Originally Posted by Pyrotex
No. E=mc^2 is the equivalence of matter and energy. It has nothing at all to do with consciousness or observers.
|
And yet in our physical universe with the equation of E=mc^2 that we assign to it, it is very evident that we, as Conscious entities are a very integral part of it, and in fact contributory to the kind of reality that we are creating and experiencing today.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pyrotex
No. this makes no sense at all. E=mc^2 is not a "dimension", has nothing to do with dimensions. No. To observe is to be aware, to see, to measure to have sensory evidence of an event. An "observer" who is not aware, cannot observe.
|
The units asssigned by E=mc^2 are based on the highest possible unit that one could possibly muster in this Universe, and that is the speed of light, therefore it has
everything to do with the dimension of our physical Universe.
I have differentiated even further than what you stated. There is the difference between an observer who is 'aware' to a given situation, to an observer who is 'unaware' to a given situation. There is a BIG difference and the implications of it are very evident in our daily decisions in every moment we experience in this dimension. Surely you can differentiate between your stepping on a pool and being 'aware' that it is deep, to stepping on it but 'unaware' of it, and the resulting implication to your space-time reality.
Awareness definitely is far more profound than your initial perception of it. And yet Awareness, being knowledge is a pattern to be deciphered. Such pattern could be intricately probed deeper into the very first instance that we exhibit such 'awareness', while we are yet on the fetal, even mitosis stage of each one's existence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pyrotex
Rocket art, this and the remainder of your post, sounds very mystical, or very confused. I suspect you do not really understand E=mc^2 or Relativity or even Science as a method of understanding.
Your ideas suggest that you are very young. If this is true, give yourself a few years and keep reading and studying. Please let me give you a hint. Physics and mystical language do not mix very well. Trying to equate "energy" and "awareness" has been tried before, but it never seems to work. Good luck.
|
I am into art, and my role is to pluck from the intangible, abstract realms, a tangible idea, an image, in which I am doing right now, and such is not an easy task for me to translate the idea behind my painting into an equation, but I did upon noticing that Einstein's formula was elegant and capable enough to assign language for it. Science as a method of understanding is a very useful
tool, and its proven usefulness is achieved because it answers the questions "how", yet dares not answer the question "why", which is appropriate.
As
Conscious individuals, we need not define how we perceive issues solely based on tools alone, because the effort of digging the truth is not solely dependent on just the tool spade alone, but on the digger himself.
Consciousness is very evident as justly deserved, and does not have to be shelved just to mysticism, although such profoundness of it will always
freely constitute to the mystery. To approach the Singularity and beyond the highest unit of lightspeed requires infinitesimal Energy and the blurring of time itself, and matter or any physical tool supposedly cannot exceed beyond it. It will be achieved with the power
within that constitute the existence of Life itself and our being Aware. This is by our
Conscious Energy alone.
Re: is the speed of light the fastest speed possible?
It sounds very similar to the law of diminishing returns... Energy input loses effectiveness per unit measure as velocity approaches c... I'm sorry, as velocity approaches B. 
