Stephen Hawking says intelligent design of the universe is highly probable? Updated, yes a hoax

_{Denyse O'Leary

March 12, 2015

Cosmology, Intelligent Design, News}

Share: Facebook; Twitter; LinkedIn; Flipboard; Print; Email

[Someone kindly tweeted: WDNR is satirical entertainment website & not a source of news –worldnewsdailyreport.com/disclaimer/ Back to work.]

And it isn’t even April 1? Ran March 8 at World News Daily:

The English theoretical physicist and cosmologist, Stephen Hawking, surprised the scientific community last week when he announced during a speech at the University of Cambridge that he believed that “some form of intelligence” was actually behind the creation of the Universe.

Presenting himself before students at the University of Cambridge, the world-famous scientist declared that his years of research on the creation of the cosmos have led him to isolate a strange scientific factor which he says is in many ways contrary to the universal laws of physics.

Personal reasons seem to play a role.

Can’t find evidence it’s a hoax as yet. Watching. Breaking.

Follow UD News at Twitter!

Comments

(It did not escape my notice that you failed to answer the bonobo question.) Then why did you say that I said something that I did not say? Do you just hastily write down whatever you think contradicts me without honestly thinking about the issue being discussed? It certainly seems that way to me! You are not scoring points with me in your continued dishonesty throughout this thread towards the subject of NDEs and souls. You state that you do not care for BIOLA emeritus Professor of Theology JP Moreland's opinion on the 'soul' subject, you want mine, but his opinion matters greatly since you are in fact asking a Theological question not a specific 'scientific' question at this point. Why do you discount his opinion since you are in fact asking a Theological question? His opinion is:
"I think very primitive animals clearly have faculties of sensation but probably not faculties of thought. Higher animals like a dog would have a faculty of thought in addition to faculties of sensation.,,, I think the human soul will never cease to exist but only because I think God sustains it.,,, but a soul can exist without a (material) body.,,, (A one celled bacteria) is not conscious. But you can explain the interaction of its parts mechanistically. (So) You have to have a whole that is prior to the parts if you have evidence that the parts function and aren't what they are in light of that (prior) whole. (i.e. The very simplest of life have a soul but do not have consciousness)." JP Moreland - BIOLA emeritus Professor of Theology - Is The Soul Immortal - 1:57 minute mark - video http://www.closertotruth.com/series/the-soul-immortal#video-2758
I agree with his opinion. Thus as to this question:
Do 1 amoebae 2 spiders 3 dogs 4 bonobos have souls?
The answer is Yes. Now, the 'scientific' confirmation of the Theistic contention that creatures have prior 'souls' which are not reducible to a material 'parts' basis, is the finding of non-local, beyond space and time, quantum information which is itself not reducible to a material basis, and which is keeping the organism functioning as a 'whole' for its entire life (and not a moment longer). i.e. 'What holds off that moment of disintegration into parts for exactly a lifetime?' It is the transcendent functional information, i.e. the soul, that keep the parts cohered as a whole for a lifetime:
“What power holds off that moment — precisely for a lifetime, and not a moment longer?” - picture http://cdn-4.spiritscienceandmetaphysics.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/harvardd-2.jpg Rabbit decomposition time-lapse (higher resolution) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C6sFP_7Vezg The Unbearable Wholeness of Beings – Stephen L. Talbott Excerpt: Virtually the same collection of molecules exists in the canine cells during the moments immediately before and after death. But after the fateful transition no one will any longer think of genes as being regulated, nor will anyone refer to normal or proper chromosome functioning. No molecules will be said to guide other molecules to specific targets, and no molecules will be carrying signals, which is just as well because there will be no structures recognizing signals. Code, information, and communication, in their biological sense, will have disappeared from the scientist’s vocabulary. ,,, the question, rather, is why things don’t fall completely apart — as they do, in fact, at the moment of death. What power holds off that moment — precisely for a lifetime, and not a moment longer? Despite the countless processes going on in the cell, and despite the fact that each process might be expected to “go its own way” according to the myriad factors impinging on it from all directions, the actual result is quite different. Rather than becoming progressively disordered in their mutual relations (as indeed happens after death, when the whole dissolves into separate fragments), the processes hold together in a larger unity. http://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/the-unbearable-wholeness-of-beings
Music:
Oingo Boingo – Weird Science – music https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jm-upHSP9KU
bornagain77_{March 16, 2015
March
03
Mar
16
16
2015
02:32 PM
2
02
32
PM
PDT}

oh dear, just when I thought we might be getting somewhere. So back to my questions at 160: Do 1 amoebae 2 spiders 3 dogs 4 bonobos have souls? (It did not escape my notice that you failed to answer the bonobo question.) AND How can you tell? Scientifically. I am interested in your opinion, not Dr. Moreland's.DNA_Jock_{March 16, 2015
March
03
Mar
16
16
2015
01:01 PM
1
01
01
PM
PDT}

DNA_Jock, I did not say that bonobos do not have souls. I said that,,, "I hold that humans are a bit different than the other creatures of God because of the image of God that is inherent within humans." Bonobo, nor the word soul, is not even mentioned in that statement. Did you misstate my position on purpose or not? It certainly seems to me you are operating in severe bad faith. If on the off chance you really did misread what I wrote that badly, and really are curious instead being purposely obstinate, Dr. Moreland gets a little more explicit on the 'soul issue', and how it relates to humans, animals, and even single cell creatures, in this following short video: JP Moreland - Is The Soul Immortal - video http://www.closertotruth.com/series/the-soul-immortal#video-2758 As to your claim that non-local, beyond space and time, quantum information does not present a problem for a Theist, well that point is obvious. But it does present a major problem for the Deist who holds that God created the universe and then let the universe run its own course without intervening any further. Exactly how you think Deism can be reconciled with God infusing information into the universe after the universe was created I have no idea. Unless you redefine Deism to such a point where Deism is no longer Deism anymore but is in fact classical Theism. So are you a Theist in Deist clothing?bornagain77_{March 16, 2015
March
03
Mar
16
16
2015
11:59 AM
11
11
59
AM
PDT}

Okay ba77, we are getting somewhere, I think. Since bonobo's lack souls (per ba77) then clearly a soul is not required to "hold everything together" until death. So the requirement is reduced to "non-material transcendent information". Even if one agrees, arguendo, that NMTI is required, this doesn't present an issue for any theist or deist position. Why are you arguing with me?DNA_Jock_{March 16, 2015
March
03
Mar
16
16
2015
09:27 AM
9
09
27
AM
PDT}

DNA_Jock, since you yourself have not gone one inch towards 'scientifically' giving me a coherent materialistic explanation for non-local quantum entanglement in life, why do you think you are responding scientifically, and not philosophically/theologically, to me right now? As to where I 'draw the line' on souls theologically speaking, I hold that humans are a bit different than the other creatures of God because of the image of God that is inherent within humans. Genesis 2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. As to your claim that there is an 'easy answer' for the 'soul issue' in Theology, you seem to be as naive about theology as you are about science. The 'soul issue', as to which creatures have 'eternal souls' and which do not, has a long and complex history in theology, with many differing viewpoints. Dr. Moreland, in the first part of the following video, gives a very brief history of the 'soul debate' in Theology: Is the Soul Immortal? (J.P. Moreland) – video http://www.disclose.tv/action/viewvideo/143334/Evidence_for_the_Existence_of_the_Soul__JP_Moreland_PhD/bornagain77_{March 16, 2015
March
03
Mar
16
16
2015
06:44 AM
6
06
44
AM
PDT}

Ba77, I am puzzled. Your answer to your question
What power holds off that moment — precisely for a lifetime, and not a moment longer?
is
Our transcendent souls hold off that moment for precisely a lifetime!
And you agree that the same thing applies to amoebae, noting
actually, since quantum entanglement exists in all life, then God created the amoeba too
Now, there is some ambiguity here, thanks to your goalpost shifting, viz:
…you have to falsify quantum non-locality in order to falsify the fact that non-material ‘transcendent’ information is ‘holding us together’!
So is it merely the case that non-material ‘transcendent’ information is holding me, you and all the amoebae together (which as a deist I can accommodate quite comfortably, if I wished), or is a transcendent soul required? You appear to be claiming that amoebae have transcendent souls. But I may have misunderstood you, and you do not think that amoebae have souls. If so, what about spiders and dogs? Where do you draw the line, and (most importantly) how can you tell? You claim to be discussing science, not theology (where the answer is easy), so please answer as ‘scientifically’ as you can, in your own words.DNA_Jock_{March 16, 2015
March
03
Mar
16
16
2015
06:24 AM
6
06
24
AM
PDT}

keith s, regardless of what you believe, the answer, (the higher dimensional nature of special relativity and souls), is coherent as to why there is disconnect in our perception between the material realm and the 'invisible' higher dimensional realm of heaven. Again, you don't like it and I can't help you there. https://uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/stephen-hawking-says-intelligent-design-of-the-universe-is-highly-probable/#comment-553712 Romans 1:20 For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse. Moreover, why are you not more worried about the scientific falsification of materialism, your base worldview within neo-Darwinism, by quantum mechanics than you are of the Theistic implications of these higher dimensions above this temporal realm and how our souls and material bodies relate to them? It seems to me that if you were truly being scientific, instead of merely dogmatic in your atheism, you would be much more concerned with that falsification since it undercuts the materialistic basis of neo-Darwinism entirely.
Quantum Physics Debunks Materialism - video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4C5pq7W5yRM&feature=c4-overview&list=UU5qDet6sa6rODi7t6wfpg8g Looking beyond space and time to cope with quantum theory - 29 October 2012 Excerpt: "Our result gives weight to the idea that quantum correlations somehow arise from outside spacetime, in the sense that no story in space and time can describe them," http://www.quantumlah.org/highlight/121029_hidden_influences.php The visible comes into existence from the invisible: Quantum Physics and Relativity 2: – Antoine Suarez PhD – video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jxuOE2Bo_i0&list=UUVmgTa2vbopdjpMNAQBqXHw What Does Quantum Physics Have to Do with Free Will? - By Antoine Suarez - July 22, 2013 Excerpt: What is more, recent experiments are bringing to light that the experimenter’s free will and consciousness should be considered axioms (founding principles) of standard quantum physics theory. So for instance, in experiments involving “entanglement” (the phenomenon Einstein called “spooky action at a distance”), to conclude that quantum correlations of two particles are nonlocal (i.e. cannot be explained by signals traveling at velocity less than or equal to the speed of light), it is crucial to assume that the experimenter can make free choices, and is not constrained in what orientation he/she sets the measuring devices. To understand these implications it is crucial to be aware that quantum physics is not only a description of the material and visible world around us, but also speaks about non-material influences coming from outside the space-time.,,, https://www.bigquestionsonline.com/content/what-does-quantum-physics-have-do-free-will
And you saying 'microtubules' are evidence against a soul is too funny, since atheists have been fighting tooth and nail against Hameroff for years, smearing his name and such, precisely because microtubles DO support the existence of the soul. Perhaps you should write these following atheists and tell them that there is nothing to worry about with microtubules?
Being the skunk at an atheist convention – Hameroff – 2006 Excerpt: In November 2006 I was invited to a meeting at the Salk Institute in La Jolla, California called “Beyond Belief”. Other speakers and attendees were predominantly atheists, and harshly critical of the notion of spirituality. They included Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Patricia Churchland, Steven Weinberg (the least venal), Neil deGrasse Tyson and others who collectively vilified creationists and religious warriors. But the speakers also ragged on the notion of any purpose or meaning to existence, heaped ridicule on the very possibility of a God-like entity (and those who believed in such an entity), declared that scientists and philosophers should set society’s moral and ethical standards, and called for a billion dollar public relations campaign to convince the public God does not exist. Near the end of the first day came my turn to speak. I began by saying that the conference to that point had been like the Spanish Inquisition in reverse - the scientists were burning the believers. And while I had no particular interest in organized religion, I did believe there could be a scientific account for spirituality. After pointing out faulty assumptions in conventional brain models for consciousness and summarizing the Penrose-Hameroff theory, I laid out my plausibility argument for scientific, secular spirituality, suggesting cosmic connections and influence in our conscious thoughts occurred via quantum interactions in microtubules. I closed with a slide of the DNA molecule which emphasized it’s internal core where quantum effects rule, suggesting a Penrose non-computable influence in genetic mutations and evolution (aimed at Dawkins in the form of a quantum-based intelligent design). At the end a few people clapped loudly, but most sat in steely silence.,,, http://quantum.webhost.uits.arizona.edu/prod/content/being-skunk-atheist-convention Quantum Entangled Consciousness – Life After Death – Stuart Hameroff – video https://vimeo.com/39982578
bornagain77_{March 16, 2015
March
03
Mar
16
16
2015
03:48 AM
3
03
48
AM
PDT}

Also, you quote the stuff about microtubules without realizing that it would undercut your case if correct. Think about it. If consciousness comes and goes depending on whether the microtubules are working properly, that is evidence against disembodied consciousness. You haven't thought this through, BA.keith s_{March 15, 2015
March
03
Mar
15
15
2015
09:54 PM
9
09
54
PM
PDT}

BA77:
keith s, you not accepting the answer I gave is not me not answering your question.
You answered a different question because you couldn't answer mine.
Sorry, I can’t help you there.
Sure you can. Answer my actual question, or be honest and admit that you can't. Here it is again:
If our souls can see and hear without eyes and ears during an NDE, then why do we need eyes and ears when we’re embodied?
keith s_{March 15, 2015
March
03
Mar
15
15
2015
09:48 PM
9
09
48
PM
PDT}

keith s, you not accepting the answer I gave is not me not answering your question. It is you not accepting the answer because you don't like it! Sorry, I can't help you there. https://uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/stephen-hawking-says-intelligent-design-of-the-universe-is-highly-probable/#comment-553712 Stuart Hameroff, who is an anesthesia Doctor, sees general anesthesia as no problem for the transcendent nature of consciousness (and moreover his ORCH OR model for consciousness now has some empirical support, which is much more than I can say for any materialistic theory of consciousness): The Day I Died : Near-Death Experience Science Documentary (2003) Part 5 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-MH7R55EDTU&index=5&list=PLD4320245B2C514D9 Hameroff's infamous Orch-Or model for quantum consciousness has confirmation: Evidence for Quantum Consciousness - video Excerpt: Fascinating new study. The chemical anesthetic 1-azidoanthracine was administered to tadpoles and found to work by disrupting microtubules in the nervous system. A second chemical which repaired the microtubules was found to restore consciousness. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Wxtzpp4Gts On consciousness, Tegmark gets one thing right, says Rob Sheldon - January 19, 2014 Excerpt: Orch OR was harshly criticized from its inception, as the brain was considered too “warm, wet, and noisy” for seemingly delicate quantum processes.. However, evidence has now shown warm quantum coherence in plant photosynthesis, bird brain navigation, our sense of smell, and brain microtubules. The recent discovery of warm temperature quantum vibrations in microtubules inside brain neurons by the research group led by Anirban Bandyopadhyay, PhD, at the National Institute of Material Sciences in Tsukuba, Japan (and now at MIT), corroborates the pair’s theory and suggests that EEG rhythms also derive from deeper level microtubule vibrations. In addition, work from the laboratory of Roderick G. Eckenhoff, MD, at the University of Pennsylvania, suggests that anesthesia, which selectively erases consciousness while sparing non-conscious brain activities, acts via microtubules in brain neurons.,,, https://uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/on-consciousness-tegmark-gets-one-thing-right-says-rob-sheldon/ of related note: ,,, zero time lag neuronal synchrony despite long conduction delays - 2008 Excerpt: Multielectrode recordings have revealed zero time lag synchronization among remote cerebral cortical areas. However, the axonal conduction delays among such distant regions can amount to several tens of milliseconds. It is still unclear which mechanism is giving rise to isochronous discharge of widely distributed neurons, despite such latencies,,, Remarkably, synchrony of neuronal activity is not limited to short-range interactions within a cortical patch. Interareal synchronization across cortical regions including interhemispheric areas has been observed in several tasks (7, 9, 11–14).,,, Beyond its functional relevance, the zero time lag synchrony among such distant neuronal ensembles must be established by mechanisms that are able to compensate for the delays involved in the neuronal communication. Latencies in conducting nerve impulses down axonal processes can amount to delays of several tens of milliseconds between the generation of a spike in a presynaptic cell and the elicitation of a postsynaptic potential (16). The question is how, despite such temporal delays, the reciprocal interactions between two brain regions can lead to the associated neural populations to fire in unison (i.e. zero time lag).,,, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2575223/ The following paper appeals to a ‘non-local’, (i.e. beyond space and time), cause to try to explain the zero lag synchronization in remote neural circuits,,, Nonlocal mechanism for cluster synchronization in neural circuits – 2011 Excerpt: The findings,,, call for reexamining sources of correlated activity in cortex,,, http://arxiv.org/abs/1103.3634bornagain77_{March 15, 2015
March
03
Mar
15
15
2015
08:58 PM
8
08
58
PM
PDT}

BA77, You and wallstreeter43 couldn't answer my simple question:
If our souls can see and hear without eyes and ears during an NDE, then why do we need eyes and ears when we’re embodied?
So here's another simple question: If consciousness is independent of the brain, why does general anesthesia render us unconscious?keith s_{March 15, 2015
March
03
Mar
15
15
2015
08:40 PM
8
08
40
PM
PDT}

DNA_Jock, to answer the question 'scientifically' you must address the fact that non-local, (beyond space and time), and 'conserved', (i.e. cannot be created or destroyed), quantum information/entanglement is found in the material body. In other words, you have to falsify quantum non-locality in order to falsify the fact that non-material 'transcendent' information is 'holding us together'! Which is certainly no small feat. Hence my quip, 'Your Nobel awaits!' You simply have no rational answer that you can give as a deist/atheist/materialist, who does not believe you have a eternal soul, as to where the non-local quantum information comes from. Nor can you answer where it goes from our material body upon death. As a theist, who does believe in an eternal soul, I have an answer for both where it comes from and where it goes: Psalm 139:13 For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother's womb. Hebrews 9:27 Just as people are destined to die once, and after that to face judgment, as to your quip about the amoeba,,, actually, since quantum entanglement exists in all life, then God created the amoeba too. I like JP Moreland's definition of a 'life/soul' in the following video: Is the Soul Immortal? (J.P. Moreland) - video http://www.disclose.tv/action/viewvideo/143334/Evidence_for_the_Existence_of_the_Soul__JP_Moreland_PhD/ James 2:26 For as the body apart from the spirit is dead,,,, Disagree that God created the amoeba too? Then, along with falsifying quantum non-locality, you can add falsifying ID to your list by generating functional information by unguided material processes! The Law of Physicodynamic Incompleteness - David L. Abel Excerpt: "If decision-node programming selections are made randomly or by law rather than with purposeful intent, no non-trivial (sophisticated) function will spontaneously arise." If only one exception to this null hypothesis were published, the hypothesis would be falsified. Falsification would require an experiment devoid of behind-the-scenes steering. Any artificial selection hidden in the experimental design would disqualify the experimental falsification. After ten years of continual republication of the null hypothesis with appeals for falsification, no falsification has been provided. The time has come to extend this null hypothesis into a formal scientific prediction: "No non trivial algorithmic/computational utility will ever arise from chance and/or necessity alone." https://www.academia.edu/9957206/The_Law_of_Physicodynamic_Incompleteness_Scirus_Topic_Page_ Of supplemental note: “Now the world appears to be divided into two realms, described by two different sets of physical laws. The quantum (world),, which is immaterial, coexisting possibilities, non-local, unified, connected, has some ultimate truth although we don’t know what it is yet, deeper levels of reality, and in many senses ‘spirit-like’. The classical world, the (illusory) billiard ball universe that we (appear to) live in right now, but not so, is material, Newtonian, definite, macroscopic, local, predictable, disconnected, post-modern, and somewhat boring actually. Now, what is life? If you approach life from classical physics, you see that biology is a set of self-organizing functions. There is no secret to life. Brain activities are equivalent to computers, consciousness is a epi-phenomenal illusion with no causal power. That’s the party line in standard neuroscience and philosophy. Accordingly, Thomas Huxley said years ago, ‘We are merely conscious automaton,’ helpless spectators., That’s the story we get from classical physics approach to the brain. Now,, applying quantum physics to biology, first by Erwin Schrodinger,,, quantum features (of biology include), non-local entanglement, super-position, unity, quantum coherence, quantum information. A kind of quantum vitalism, may play key roles in biological function.,,,” Stuart Hameroff – Does Quantum Biology Support A Quantum Soul? – video https://vimeo.com/29895068bornagain77_{March 15, 2015
March
03
Mar
15
15
2015
08:09 PM
8
08
09
PM
PDT}

Ba77, One could ask the same question, i.e. "What power holds off that moment — precisely for a lifetime, and not a moment longer?", about an amoeba. By and large, I would answer "adequate oxygen supply". I don`t see how a transcendental soul helps explain how part of your body can die, but leave the rest of you alive. Does the soul of your hand leave your body when the hand is amputated? The anoxia can be local, or more general. Brain hypoxia can produce some quite impressive conscious experiences, apparently...DNA_Jock_{March 15, 2015
March
03
Mar
15
15
2015
07:40 PM
7
07
40
PM
PDT}

Moreover, this quantum information that is found in every DNA and protein molecule is found to be ‘physically conserved’ (not just mathematically conserved),,,
Quantum no-hiding theorem experimentally confirmed for first time Excerpt: In the classical world, information can be copied and deleted at will. In the quantum world, however, the conservation of quantum information means that information cannot be created nor destroyed. This concept stems from two fundamental theorems of quantum mechanics: the no-cloning theorem and the no-deleting theorem. A third and related theorem, called the no-hiding theorem, addresses information loss in the quantum world. According to the no-hiding theorem, if information is missing from one system (which may happen when the system interacts with the environment), then the information is simply residing somewhere else in the Universe; in other words, the missing information cannot be hidden in the correlations between a system and its environment. http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-03-quantum-no-hiding-theorem-experimentally.html Quantum no-deleting theorem Excerpt: A stronger version of the no-cloning theorem and the no-deleting theorem provide permanence to quantum information. To create a copy one must import the information from some part of the universe and to delete a state one needs to export it to another part of the universe where it will continue to exist. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_no-deleting_theorem#Consequence
Besides providing direct empirical falsification of neo-Darwinian claims as to the generation of functional information from a material basis, the implication of finding ‘non-local’, beyond space and time, and ‘conserved’, quantum information in molecular biology on such a massive scale is fairly, and pleasantly, obvious:
Does Quantum Biology Support A Quantum Soul? – Stuart Hameroff – video (notes in description) http://vimeo.com/29895068 Quantum Entangled Consciousness – Life After Death – Stuart Hameroff – video https://vimeo.com/39982578
Thus DNA_Jock, there is actually direct empirical support for the Theist's contention that we have a eternal soul that 'holds off that moment — precisely for a lifetime, and not a moment longer'. Whereas you, as a deist/atheist, have nothing but dishonest rhetoric that we do not have a soul. If you disagree, then please provide empirical evidence that material particles can explain non-local, and 'conserved', quantum information/entanglement in our material bodies. You Nobel awaits! Quote, Verse and Music:
“There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.” Shakespeare Matthew 10:28 “Do not fear those who kill the body but are unable to kill the soul; but rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell. Mystery Of Grace-4HIM – music https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qcNbzvFylmc
bornagain77_{March 15, 2015
March
03
Mar
15
15
2015
06:35 PM
6
06
35
PM
PDT}

DNA, Of related interest to man having a transcendent component to his being that is not reducible to material. Wigner stated:
"It was not possible to formulate the laws (of quantum theory) in a fully consistent way without reference to consciousness." Eugene Wigner (1902 -1995) from his collection of essays "Symmetries and Reflections – Scientific Essays";
and he also stated:
"It will remain remarkable, in whatever way our future concepts may develop, that the very study of the external world led to the scientific conclusion that the content of the consciousness is the ultimate universal reality" - Eugene Wigner - (Remarks on the Mind-Body Question, Eugene Wigner, in Wheeler and Zurek, p.169) 1961 - received Nobel Prize in 1963 for 'Quantum Symmetries'
Of supplemental note to the preceding Wigner 'consciousness' quotes, it is interesting to note that many of Wigner's insights have now been experimentally verified and are also now fostering a 'second' revolution in quantum mechanics,,,
Eugene Wigner – A Gedanken Pioneer of the Second Quantum Revolution - Anton Zeilinger - Sept. 2014 Conclusion It would be fascinating to know Eugene Wigner’s reaction to the fact that the gedanken experiments he discussed (in 1963 and 1970) have not only become reality, but building on his gedanken experiments, new ideas have developed which on the one hand probe the foundations of quantum mechanics even deeper, and which on the other hand also provide the foundations to the new field of quantum information technology. All these experiments pay homage to the great insight Wigner expressed in developing these gedanken experiments and in his analyses of the foundations of quantum mechanics, http://epjwoc.epj.org/articles/epjconf/pdf/2014/15/epjconf_wigner2014_01010.pdf
Thus, since Wigner’s insights into the foundational role of the ‘conscious observer’ in Quantum Mechanics are bearing fruit with a ‘Second Quantum Revolution’, then that is certainly very strong evidence that his ‘consciousness’ insights are indeed true. DNA_Jock, In further note to man having a transcendent component to his being that is not reducible to a material basis, I have a question for you. When material bodies die here on earth they rapidly start to decay. I can even demonstrate it in real time for you:
Rabbit decomposition time-lapse (higher resolution) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C6sFP_7Vezg
My question for you DNA is,,,
“What power holds off that moment — precisely for a lifetime, and not a moment longer?” - picture http://cdn-4.spiritscienceandmetaphysics.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/harvardd-2.jpg The Unbearable Wholeness of Beings – Stephen L. Talbott Excerpt: Virtually the same collection of molecules exists in the canine cells during the moments immediately before and after death. But after the fateful transition no one will any longer think of genes as being regulated, nor will anyone refer to normal or proper chromosome functioning. No molecules will be said to guide other molecules to specific targets, and no molecules will be carrying signals, which is just as well because there will be no structures recognizing signals. Code, information, and communication, in their biological sense, will have disappeared from the scientist’s vocabulary. ,,, the question, rather, is why things don’t fall completely apart — as they do, in fact, at the moment of death. What power holds off that moment — precisely for a lifetime, and not a moment longer? Despite the countless processes going on in the cell, and despite the fact that each process might be expected to “go its own way” according to the myriad factors impinging on it from all directions, the actual result is quite different. Rather than becoming progressively disordered in their mutual relations (as indeed happens after death, when the whole dissolves into separate fragments), the processes hold together in a larger unity. http://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/the-unbearable-wholeness-of-beings
Now, as a Theist who believes that we have eternal souls that live past the deaths of our material bodies, I have a ready answer as to 'what holds off that moment for precisely a life time?'. i.e. Our transcendent souls hold off that moment for precisely a lifetime! But DNA, as a deist/atheist, who does not believe you have an eternal soul, you have no coherent answer to that question. Moreover, I can provide empirical evidence for my belief that we have a transcendent component to our being that is 'holding us together' for precisely a lifetime. As Talbott mentioned in his article, the information that was keeping us alive all our lives suddenly goes 'missing' upon the death of our material bodies. Where did it go? In clarifying this point of the relatedness of 'missing' information and the soul, it is helpful to learn about the nature of information. In regards to the ‘transcendent’ nature of information. Dr. Stephen Meyer states:
“One of the things I do in my classes, to get this idea across to students, is I hold up two computer disks. One is loaded with software, and the other one is blank. And I ask them, ‘what is the difference in mass between these two computer disks, as a result of the difference in the information content that they posses’? And of course the answer is, ‘Zero! None! There is no difference as a result of the information. And that’s because information is a mass-less quantity. Now, if information is not a material entity, then how can any materialistic explanation account for its origin? How can any material cause explain it’s origin? And this is the real and fundamental problem that the presence of information in biology has posed. It creates a fundamental challenge to the materialistic, evolutionary scenarios because information is a different kind of entity that matter and energy cannot produce. In the nineteenth century we thought that there were two fundamental entities in science; matter, and energy. At the beginning of the twenty first century, we now recognize that there’s a third fundamental entity; and its ‘information’. It’s not reducible to matter. It’s not reducible to energy. But it’s still a very important thing that is real; we buy it, we sell it, we send it down wires. Now, what do we make of the fact, that information is present at the very root of all biological function? In biology, we have matter, we have energy, but we also have this third, very important entity; information. I think the biology of the information age, poses a fundamental challenge to any materialistic approach to the origin of life.” -Dr. Stephen C. Meyer earned his Ph.D. in the History and Philosophy of science from Cambridge University for a dissertation on the history of origin-of-life biology and the methodology of the historical sciences. Intelligent design: Why can’t biological information originate through a materialistic process? – Stephen Meyer – video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqiXNxyoof8
Materialists/atheists would believe, since they hold information to be merely emergent from a material basis, that the information in the organism simply, suddenly, ceased to exist and disappeared into then air upon the death of an organism. But our science tells us otherwise. In learning what actually happens to the information of an organism, information that was keeping the organism alive, upon death of an organism, it is helpful to learn a little bit about the hierarchy of information in the body. There are two types of information in an organism. First, there is the ‘normal’ classical/digital information, which Darwinists and ID proponents constantly debate over, that we find encoded in DNA, RNA and Proteins:
Every Bit Digital: DNA’s Programming Really Bugs Some ID Critics – Casey Luskin – 2010 Excerpt: “There’s a very recognizable digital code of the kind that electrical engineers rediscovered in the 1950s that maps the codes for sequences of DNA onto expressions of proteins.” http://www.salvomag.com/new/articles/salvo12/12luskin2.php
And then there is also the much well less known 'non-local', beyond space and time, quantum information within life. In other words, besides the ‘normal’ classical/digital information that is found in life, there is now also found to be non-local ‘quantum’ information in life that is not reducible to a material basis. Moreover, this quantum information is found in every DNA and Protein molecule:
Quantum Information/Entanglement In DNA – short video https://vimeo.com/92405752 Coherent Intrachain energy migration at room temperature – Elisabetta Collini and Gregory Scholes – University of Toronto – Science, 323, (2009), pp. 369-73 Excerpt: The authors conducted an experiment to observe quantum coherence dynamics in relation to energy transfer. The experiment, conducted at room temperature, examined chain conformations, such as those found in the proteins of living cells. Neighbouring molecules along the backbone of a protein chain were seen to have coherent energy transfer. Where this happens quantum decoherence (the underlying tendency to loss of coherence due to interaction with the environment) is able to be resisted, and the evolution of the system remains entangled as a single quantum state. http://www.scimednet.org/quantum-coherence-living-cells-and-protein/ Physicists Discover Quantum Law of Protein Folding – February 22, 2011 Quantum mechanics finally explains why protein folding depends on temperature in such a strange way. Excerpt: First, a little background on protein folding. Proteins are long chains of amino acids that become biologically active only when they fold into specific, highly complex shapes. The puzzle is how proteins do this so quickly when they have so many possible configurations to choose from. To put this in perspective, a relatively small protein of only 100 amino acids can take some 10^100 different configurations. If it tried these shapes at the rate of 100 billion a second, it would take longer than the age of the universe to find the correct one. Just how these molecules do the job in nanoseconds, nobody knows.,,, Their astonishing result is that this quantum transition model fits the folding curves of 15 different proteins and even explains the difference in folding and unfolding rates of the same proteins. That’s a significant breakthrough. Luo and Lo’s equations amount to the first universal laws of protein folding. That’s the equivalent in biology to something like the thermodynamic laws in physics. http://www.technologyreview.com/view/423087/physicists-discover-quantum-law-of-protein/ etc.. etc..
bornagain77_{March 15, 2015
March
03
Mar
15
15
2015
06:34 PM
6
06
34
PM
PDT}

wallstreeter, You have repeatedly chastised others for their ignorance of the AWARE study, but when I quote the most important data from that study verbatim, your excuse for not recognizing the quote is that you read the study three months ago? Really?"" Really DNA, but if course an ultra hardcore atheist like u would t believe me . I was actually on one of the. It's active forums that dealt with the aware study , skeptiko . But of course if u do t believe doctor parnia , why would u believe me lol The easiest way for atheist to respond when u have them cornered is to just say they don't believe what anyone in the study said. Notice that DNA trusted everything else the 57 year old said that was confirmed by oarnia and the other witnesses but when there was an evidence that was confirmed that slam dunked DNA jock , he wiggled out by saying that he simply didn't believe parnia and the patient . This is simply amazing . The fact that was confirmed by parnia ""he heard 2 specific bleeps, not beeps . Parnia confirmed this as accurately describing the device " and how does fan in his honest supposedly deistic fashion answer? I don't believe him ""lol All I have to say here is SLAM DUNK , POINT PROVEN and THE ATHEIST HAS BEEN FLUSHED OUT;)wallstreeter43_{March 15, 2015
March
03
Mar
15
15
2015
06:25 PM
6
06
25
PM
PDT}

Sorry it's my ipad spell checker . ""Regarding the 2 beeps: I am certain that the patient remembers hearing two beeps. I do not concede that he actually heard two beeps. There’s a difference."" Actually it's a bleep and he saw the device , this was confirmed by parnia . You can keep saying you don't believe him but we both know that if parnia confirmed the opposite you would have paraded the results around as disproving Nde's . Lets get this straight . You don't believe parnia and u don't believe the patient. And with the wave of his magic wand the atheist just waves away everything by saying he doesn't believe anyone . So by your admission we can't believe 99% of science since we haven't confirmed it ourselves lol. There is no sense in arguing with someone like this. You are correct in stating that u are not an atheist . You are in fact an ultra hardcore militant atheist . Now the agnostics and seeker can see the way a militant atheist reasons and how unreasonable he is with anything that goes against hs position , Thank God my deist uncle isn't into going online or he would have rolling his eyes every time u claimed that ur a deist lol. You ain't no deist my friend . Dawkins would have been proud .wallstreeter43_{March 15, 2015
March
03
Mar
15
15
2015
06:18 PM
6
06
18
PM
PDT}

No idea what "major co penny’s of the nde example " means. Please type more slowly, you are getting somewhat incoherent. Regarding the 2 beeps: I am certain that the patient remembers hearing two beeps. I do not concede that he actually heard two beeps. There's a difference.DNA_Jock_{March 15, 2015
March
03
Mar
15
15
2015
05:59 PM
5
05
59
PM
PDT}

wallstreeter, You have repeatedly chastised others for their ignorance of the AWARE study, but when I quote the most important data from that study verbatim, your excuse for not recognizing the quote is that you read the study three months ago? Really?DNA_Jock_{March 15, 2015
March
03
Mar
15
15
2015
05:55 PM
5
05
55
PM
PDT}

""Wallstreeter, I see that you have joined bornagain in calling me a liar. Your cognitive biases are showing: “anyone who does not agree with me must, absolutely must carry some ideological blinkers that are preventing them from seeing the TRVTH.” Motes and beams, kids."" Sorry dna I call it like it is . U can claim whatever u like but when u ignore major co penny's of the nde example and focus only on the ones that fit ur atheistic worldview that sends up huge read flags . I'm a Trekkie and if captain Picard were here red alerts would be flashing throughout this ship. DNA the 2 bleeps heard clearly were heard and confirmed and this is why parnia said that the patient coupon have only heard these bleeps after his heart stopped beating . I think I'll take parnia word over yours, as he is the he who did the study . He's the main guy . 2 bleeps is 3 minutes , and u can sptwist , dodge , lie and conflab all you want but u can't run away from this fact of the study , no matter how much your atheistic brain tries . When I OT deception I'm like a bulldog . It must be the OCD part of me . Do you concede that this man heard 2 bleeps or not ! Now if your satisfied with being a dogmatic religiously blind faith end atheist that's ok , America is the land of free will and free choice :)wallstreeter43_{March 15, 2015
March
03
Mar
15
15
2015
05:41 PM
5
05
41
PM
PDT}

Well, I haven’t read a lot of the nde literature, but it appears that you have read even less! You have been going on and on interminably about how seminal the AWARE study is, but when I point you to my post 42 you respond:"" Actually I did read it but I was just making sure as when inreac it , it was months back . But again instead of responding to my claims about the patient clearly hearing 2 bleeps and this was even confirmed by doctor parnia , you dodged it completely . Why ? Dude may eu need to start laughing at urself because even parnia confirmed that he did hear the device bleep twice .wallstreeter43_{March 15, 2015
March
03
Mar
15
15
2015
05:35 PM
5
05
35
PM
PDT}

Wallstreeter, I see that you have joined bornagain in calling me a liar. Your cognitive biases are showing: "anyone who does not agree with me must, absolutely must carry some ideological blinkers that are preventing them from seeing the TRVTH." Motes and beams, kids.DNA_Jock_{March 15, 2015
March
03
Mar
15
15
2015
05:35 PM
5
05
35
PM
PDT}

""You`ve written this a couple of times now. Each time I read it, I laugh. Does this 57-y-o man see with his d#ck?"" Apparently his d ck can critically think better then an atheist like u , and with more intellectual tual honesty than an atheist like u ;) Sorry to expose ur atbeism my friend but it's better to come out if the closet now then later ;)wallstreeter43_{March 15, 2015
March
03
Mar
15
15
2015
05:32 PM
5
05
32
PM
PDT}

BA said ""walk like a duck, talk like a duck, probably is a duck? Ehh wallstreeter! That’s my test. DNA, Perhaps you should put a small disclaimer on the bottom of your posts, “NO! , I AM NOT AN ATHEIST!”, so people will not continually confuse you with being an atheist? "" I have never seen anyone be as delusional as DNA jockey . At least Piotr have an excuse fir their dodging the evidences. They admit they are atheists . DNA is clearly ashamed of being called what he really is : a full fledge 100% practicing atheist . It's amazing how he called himself a deist and twisted every evidence away to make it look like a pro atheist fact. I know quite a few deists . In fact I have 2 other friends who are deists and their heads would have exploded if they had seen the way DNA jock had twisted the aware study example the way he just did . DNA why don't u come on over to the skeptiko forum . Those guys would have a field day with a pseudo skeptic atheist like u. U just have studied under professor patricia churchland cause ur wrists were worthy of how she twisted doctor Lommel into looking like he was. Skeptic of Nde's when he is one if the. Ingest pro nde guys out there. Granted he was a materialist atheist before his study , but at least he had the intellectual honesty to follow the evidence to where it lead him. You apparently are a different brand of atheist ;)wallstreeter43_{March 15, 2015
March
03
Mar
15
15
2015
05:30 PM
5
05
30
PM
PDT}

There is lots of evidence e that u didn’t push I to like the fact that the man described the nurse even though he had a sheet draped over his groin area.
You`ve written this a couple of times now. Each time I read it, I laugh. Does this 57-y-o man see with his d#ck?DNA_Jock_{March 15, 2015
March
03
Mar
15
15
2015
05:30 PM
5
05
30
PM
PDT}

wallstreeter, you crack me up! You chastise me thus:
It’s obvious to me that u didn’t look deep into the literature to see these examples which tells me that you have. Clear atheistic type bias .
Well, I haven't read a lot of the nde literature, but it appears that you have read even less! You have been going on and on interminably about how seminal the AWARE study is, but when I point you to my post 42 you respond:
just as I thought u cherry picked the evidence that favored the atheistic position. Here is an example . And also where is the link frim your category 5 recollection from the aware study and was it from the 57 year old social worker?
which is really awkward for you, since my blockquote in post 42 is taken verbatim from the AWARE preprint It is Table 2 of Parnia et al. Resuscitation. 2014 Dec;85(12):1799-805 Category 5 recollector #1 was 57 years old. The simplest explanation is that you have not actually read the AWARE study. IDists do score the most delightful own-goals.DNA_Jock_{March 15, 2015
March
03
Mar
15
15
2015
05:25 PM
5
05
25
PM
PDT}

Also be aware (heh) that the subjective timelines that people experience can be highly distorted as compared with time measured with a clock. So your assertion that a veridical nde occurred at a time when there was no brain function is not supported."" And again here as this man had his nde after his heart failed and he heard the device bleep twice . Now your wiggling out if this by saying its subjective.. He heard 2 bleeps , and this can't be distorted . Read my lips , 2 bleeps =3 minutes . There can be no arguing this fact. This is why the smarter atheists are trying to say that they should have interviewed him on the spot lol. Man U are clearly reaching here to try to distort the story to fit your atheistic worldview . Why indeed would u call out a fellow atheist ;) Imagine the scenario that it was found out that this man clearly had his nde during the time op of brain activity . We both know that it would have been a clear and cut case. DNA jock so why are u going to admit to us that ur really an atheist and not a deist ;) Come on man , let it outwallstreeter43_{March 15, 2015
March
03
Mar
15
15
2015
05:24 PM
5
05
24
PM
PDT}

walk like a duck, talk like a duck, probably is a duck? Ehh wallstreeter! That's my test. :) DNA, Perhaps you should put a small disclaimer on the bottom of your posts, "NO! , I AM NOT AN ATHEIST!", so people will not continually confuse you with being an atheist? :)bornagain77_{March 15, 2015
March
03
Mar
15
15
2015
05:18 PM
5
05
18
PM
PDT}

""me, the nurse, and another man who had a bald head. . .I couldn’t see his face but I could see the back of his body. He was quite a chunky fella. . . He had blue scrubs on, and he had a blue hat, but I could tell he didn’t have any hair, because of where the hat was."" Again DNA jock this was one of the staff that was facing his body . Now if you really were seeking the full and unbiased truth here you would have known that that this bald guy was facing the body and if the patient were physiologically aware he would have seen the front of his face , not the back of his head like the patient who was on the side of the room . He had no access to this man before. Your post smacks of bias in every which way . If you were honest you would have asked urself how could this man have seen what he saw from the vantage point of where he as at during this time. You didn't and this tells me that you have an atheistic -materialistic bias that is on the extreme side .the you gave urself away by posting this info, so thank u for debunking yourself . And again we see this clear atheistic bias as was shown above , except here it's much worse . ""I have watched two women put on “X-ray vision glasses” that allowed them to see the naked bodies of clothed people. Or so they believed at the time. It was absolutely hilarious as they pointed and laughed, but also thought-provoking. How did their minds synthesize images that they found credible? Unless of course you think that the glasses worked as advertised…"" How does any normal critical thinking person compare this story with a. Veridical nde which was confirmed by the hospital staff . It's clear to me DNA jock that you have a clear bias . It's almost as if you don't want them to be true . Doctor Antony flew , even though i respected the man very much was asked once that since he now is a deist and believes sin a creator , does he believe in an afterlife. His response was very interesting because he said they he really hoped that there wasn't one . That this was the end of him because he couldn't fathom being eternally alive as he would get bored out if his mind. But you dna are clearly unlike any deist I have ever met. I see an atheist . There is lots of evidence e that u didn't push I to like the fact that the man described the nurse even though he had a sheet draped over his groin area. You can claim that he made up those images in his brain, but fir him to recognize these people when he wok up doesn't jive. The fact that u didn't catch these subtle nuances tells me that u didn't want to. It's clear that your a sharp guy , but fior some reason ,ur story of wanting them to be true is err bologna . The true answer is that u don't want them to be true . One day u will come out if the closet and admit that ur an atheist . Your not fooling anyone here . I know many deists and none of them are as atheistically biased as u are . Nice try though ;) ""wallstreeter43_{March 15, 2015
March
03
Mar
15
15
2015
05:18 PM
5
05
18
PM
PDT}

DNA jock , just as I thought u cherry picked the evidence that favored the atheistic position. Here is an example . And also where is the link frim your category 5 recollection from the aware study and was it from the 57 year old social worker? DNA jock said ""wallstreeter – Consider the following: A Christian who believes that NDEs are ‘spiritual’ would predict that both Christians and Hindus would have ‘Christian’ NDEs. A Hindu who believes that NDEs are ‘spiritual’ would predict that both Christians and Hindus would have ‘Hindu’ NDEs. Anyone who believes the NDEs have a physiological explanation, whether they be Christian, Hindu, Muslim, or atheist, would predict that Christians would have ‘Christian’ NDEs, and Hindus would have ‘Hindu’ NDEs. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3950600 Ho hum."" And while many of them were having these types ogpfbhigh Nde's you conveniently forgot the many Nde's that were the complete opposite of what you just predicted . Howard storm was a hardcore atheist professor yet saw Jesus in his nde and is a pastor today. Ian McCormick was also another atheist who believed that religion was. Afairy take, he also saw Jesus and is a pastor today. You also have Muslims having Christian Nde's etc. It's obvious to me that u didn't look deep into the literature to see these examples which tells me that you have. Clear atheistic type bias . I have yet to see one religious person have an nde that told them atheism was true or even agnosticism . As I said before it's clear to me that if you are a deist , you clearly have an atheistic bias :) It's clear enough to anyone watching your posts , except of course if we preach to the atheistic choir.wallstreeter43_{March 15, 2015
March
03
Mar
15
15
2015
04:58 PM
4
04
58
PM
PDT}

1 2 3 … 6 Next

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Leave a Reply