Re: (Quantum) suicide not necessary?

From: rwas rwas <>
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2001 18:39:30 -0800 (PST)

--- rwas rwas <> wrote:
> > versions of many-worlds theories, one might
> > consider a different approach.
> >
> > By deleting certain sectors of one's memory
> one
> > should be able to travel
> > to different branches of the multiverse.
> Suppose
> > you are diagnosed with
> > a rare disease. You don't have complaints yet,
> > but you will die
> > within a year. If you could delete the
> > information that you have this
> > particular disease (and also the information
> > that information has
> > been deleted), branches in which you don't
> have
> > the disease
> > merge with the branches in which you do have
> the
> > disease. So with
> > very high probability you have traveled to a
> > different branch.
> > I don't know whether to be relieved or annoyed
> > that I'm not the only person to think of this ;D.
> As a student of mysticism, I meditate often and
> explore mind, consciousness, and feeling. Your
> experiment points to the process of "quieting the
> ego". The framework for "I-ness" that gives meaning
> to
> our existence here. At some point one experiences a
> complete loss of "I" and any constraint of
> consciousness formed by life here. One appears to
> move
> through something from here to somewhere else. The
> strange part is when you are conscious in both
> places.
> For the purpose of this convo I'll say alternate
> universes. I had read in mystic writings that time
> and
> space are an illusion. It seems physicists (masters
> of
> intellect) are coming to the same conclusion 10,000
> years after the masters of the soul and mind had.
> I offer this comparison not as proof, but mainly to
> demonstrate the irony I perceive. I grew up with a
> strong perpensity for intellect and mind. I was
> attracted to mysticism for some strange reason but
> found conflict between my understanding of the
> physical and myself from an intellect's point of
> view.
> Melding the two worlds of understanding was and
> still
> is difficult.
> I also have a strong interest in AI and have
> developed
> my own theories of synthetic consciousness.
> Interestingly enough, they seem to point to what
> I've
> found through meditation, if not exactly
> representative of the process.
> One particular experience involved waking up from
> sleep after meditating about 3 hours prior. I was
> aware in a place with no time or dimension. I got up
> to relieve myself and found myself slipping between
> two realities. The sensation was that of traveling
> between two points, but not travel like one expects.
> It seemed reality was being folded depending on
> where
> I went. One or the other by itself was'nt too
> impressive, but when combined (both points joined)
> the
> result was unsettling. The awareness of
> non-dimension
> while trying to stand upright is an odd experience.
> I
> had no trouble standing up but "up" had no meaning.
> It
> was necessary to keep from falling down but I was
> not
> consciously bound to dimension or time.
> Again, I provide this as an illustration of things
> that have been discussed in this list found and
> verified (at least to me) in alternate methods. One
> important point to emphasize is that in these
> realms,
> dimension is useless. This means the classical
> physics
> falls down. Without a way to measure something or
> compare something, one trained in thinking where
> observables are constrained to things measurable
> would
> be lost. Emphasis on characteristics and
> relationships
> between characteristics in a completely abstract way
> are the only way to grasp what is observed.
> For me, an afterlife is a certainty. I have no
> doubts
> that physical science will bridge the gap between
> *here and there*. The biggest issue I see with the
> theories I see is that they seem to demand that
> alternate places behave and act like the physical
> here. In this place, we are confined to act and
> perceive with the five senses. We "do" with our
> physical body as go-between, between consciousness
> and
> the physical. It seems most people proposing
> theories
> have no experience effecting outcomes with anything
> but their physical bodies, so it's not too
> surprising
> that they constrain their alternate (theories of)
realities to the
> same limitations found here.
> I'll provide a mystically influenced frame work to
> consider...
> The physical (the apparent in mystic terms) is a
> place
> where *things* persist. This is unique to this
> place.
> Trying to take something that persists (ie.,
> spacecraft, diagnostic vehicle, etc) else where,
> would
> result in the persistent object succoming to
> in-persistent laws. It would dissolve.
> The discussions here seem to revolve around
> consciousness, the laws which it is found in, and
> methods to delineate consciousness. From my
> perspective, consciousness is the *only* vehicle in
> which to transcend the realm of persistence.
> Again to restate the irony I perceive, the
> experiment
> mentioned involving altering memory, is in effect,
> what mystics do to transcend the physical. They
> actually train themselves to ignore the memory that
> binds them to this place, making them free to see
> what
> their consciousness perceives constantly, but could
> not grasp or pick out from the noise. Another
> example
> of this is sensory deprivation.
> Unfortunately, it's impossible to demonstrate such
> experiences in physically measurable ways. Until
> folks
> develop the ability to move things with their minds,
> or
> somehow effect the physical with their new found
> understanding derived through higher consciousness,
> it
> will remain a curiosity and recreation of the mind.
> Robert W.
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.

Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
Received on Mon Mar 05 2001 - 18:51:36 PST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Feb 16 2018 - 13:20:07 PST