Re: God=G_uv & 7/20 Questions

From: Russell E. Rierson (analog57_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 09/17/04 

Date: 17 Sep 2004 01:41:42 -0700

"George Hammond" <nowhere@nomailspam.com> wrote:
> >
> > [1.] My first observation/question is that it seems more likely that
> > the orthogonal cleavages of the human brain are the product of many
> > millions of years of evolution
>
> [Hammond]
> Well.... I don't want to digress here... but obviously you wouldn't
> say "the conic sections of planetary orbits are due to billions of years of
> probability".... no rather, it is quite obvious that the conic section
> orbits (ellipse, parabola, circle) are due to the "quadratic metric
> of real space". IOW, there are some things that are "a priori to
> statistical Evolution" and can never be changed by evolution... because they
> depend on the underlying metrical character of space. As we shall
> see later, the 3-axis orthognal cleavage of the human body is
> also one of these "a priori metrical" facts, and has nothing to do with
> "Darwin" or "statistical chance" or "Natural Selection" or "Evolution".

Thanks for the clarification, yes, biological evolution is beholden to
the underlying metrical character of space-time.

>
>
> > - since life first appeared. The
> > universe was here BEFORE humans were. Of course you mention a type of
> > retro? causation - with the first appearance of homospaiens, Mr.
> > Hammond.
> >
> > What is the model for retro-causation? is it analogous to a Goedel
> > rotating universe?
>
> [Hammond]
> Whoa professor...! Please reign in you 170 IQ for a minute.
> This is NOT complicated.... on the contrary, it is SIMPLE.
> The fact that it is simple, is what makes it almost impossible
> for the average person to understand.... simple things are far more
> difficult to understand than elaborate and encyclopediac things.
> I'm sure you are aware of this.
> The "retro causation" as you so aptly put it is a very simple concept,
> but because it is the explanation of "God" itself, few people in history
> have ever understood it. St. Augustine and Jesus being among the
> few early pioneers to recognize and understand it.
> What it means is simply this:
>
> NOTE:
> First of all we are only talking "classical physics" here,
> NOT quantum physics.
>
> Modern man has always assumed that there is an absolute reality
> "out there" and that the 5 senses and the brain (or mind)
> produces a "mental image" of this reality. Nominally we
> presume that there is a 1:1 relation between "perceived
> reality" (seen reality) and this "absolute reality".
>
> Classical Physics assumes this also; that there is an "absolute
> reality" and that Man is simply an "independent observer" of it.
>
> However, long ago, a branch of study known as "Theology"
> noticed that there was a systematic and fundamental departure
> between "seen reality" and "absolute reality". They noticed
> that the poor, the disabled, the downtrodden and oppressed and
> the malnourished had very poor perception of actual reality.
> They soon recognized this was due to poor growth, that society
> produced MANY below average growth people and that they
> couldn't see right and acted unreliably because of it.
>
> Religion finally figured out that only a full grown physical speciman
> sees "absolute reality" and that the rest of us, especially the poor
> see a "magnified and speeded up" version of reality.... so much
> so that it scares them and they can't compete. All due to poor
> growth.... specifically of course, Brain Growth. Simply put, if
> you're small and slow because of poor growth, the world will
> look "bigger and faster" than it actually is.

If what you say is true, then to a "hypothetical" person, who acheives
100% of their brain growth potential, time would stop? They would
become invisible to others?[honest & polite question]

Human brain size:

http://www.sciencenetlinks.com/sci_update.cfm?DocID=166

QUOTE:

The most we can say about brain size and intelligence is that by and
large, all other things being equal, people who have larger brains
tend to have slightly higher I.Q.'s than people with smaller brains.
(I.Q. stands for intelligence quotient; it's a standard measure of
intellectual ability.) But a lot of things have to be taken into
account. For example, when you compare brain size, you really have to
compare brain size relative to body mass. It's not reasonable to
expect a 5'1", 100-pound woman to have the same size brain as a 6'6",
280-pound man. You have to ask the question: Is this person's brain
larger or smaller than you might expect, given his or her body mass?

Even then, the relationship between brain size and intelligence is
pretty weak, and there are lots of exceptions. Anatole France, a
French author, had one of the tiniest "normal" brains on record, but
he was certainly no dummy. On the other extreme, Jonathan Swift (the
author of Gulliver's Travels) had a big honkin' brain, at the top end
of all the brains ever measured (though still only twice the size of
Anatole France's). Does that mean Swift was the smartest man who ever
lived? He was certainly a bright guy, but it's hard to get behind any
statement so extreme.

Still, it's hard to dismiss brain size entirely. The weak relationship
between brain size and intelligence that shows up within the human
population is somewhat more striking across the animal kingdom.
Compared to other animals, humans have enormous brains compared to our
body size (triple what you would expect in an average animal).
Dolphins, other primates, and small whales also have big brains, and
they're all pretty smart too. Within birds, parrots have big relative
brain sizes, and chickens have tiny ones. And based on lab studies of
learning and thinking, parrots are geniuses compared to chickens.

Overall, though, many factors besides mere size probably contribute to
how well a brain functions, including the way it's organized, how many
nerve cells are packed in per square inch, the quality of nutrition
and environmental stimulation that you get while your brain is
developing, and a host of other issues. Also, don't forget that these
studies measure intelligence in terms of I.Q. score—a useful scale,
but not necessarily the final word on how smart someone is. Many
successful, shrewd, creative, and intelligent people have only average
I.Q.'s, while many people with high I.Q.'s are underachievers.

END QUOTE

>
> Pressing on, Religion finally began calling this mythical "full grown
> person"..... "GOD". And soon the difference between
> a full grown human and an average human began to be
> called "God in heaven". This is because they recognized
> that the "ungrown, or partially grown" part of the Brain
> had a subliminal effect on people. Today it's called the
> "Unconscious Mind".
>
> OK, all that is ancient history. With the advent of modern Science
> we come up to what is called "Classical Physics". Classical Physics
> Makes the same assumption we've always made, that there is
> an "absolute reality" and Man is an "independent observer" of
> this reality.

If I understand you correctly, we all share a
common[absolute/invariant] reality, even though our perceptions of
that reality depend on our relative persectives. For example, even
though perceptions of reality are different, those different[specific]
perspectives, must obey the same[general/invariant] laws of physics.

>The "Laws of Physics" it turns out describe accurately
> this "absolute reality".... irregardless of whether anyone is full
> grown enough to actually SEE it. Physics doesn't CARE whether
> anyone can actually SEE it. Theology on the other hand, which is
> Social Psychology, DOES. This is the difference between
> Science and Religion. Science IGNORES the fact that man is
> an imperfect observer, and in fact that there is a systematic
> distortion of "reality" caused by poverty and incomplete growth.
> However, RELIGION which is a Psychological effort does
> NOT ignore this phenomena, because in fact, this phenomena causes
> massive disruption, wars, crime, depressions and accidents.

>> [6.] No one reaches their full potential, if I interpret you
>> correctly.

[Hammond]
>Boy, you got that one right! And the main reason is
>poverty. Everybody is trying desperately to reach this
>full potential, hence all of human competition is over
>"God". Of course, God's plan is to have everyone
>cooperate so the society can produce enough to grow
>everybody to full growth.... this is what is called
>"human progress". But we don't live in a perfect world,
>so this competition for "reaching God" or "reaching
>heaven on Earth first" breaks down from cooperation to
>competition and we get wars over it.

It has been my experience that, in general, people with "nothing"
share relatively everything, and people with "everything" share
relatively nothing. Surplus creates greed, greed creates more
imbalance. Imbalance creates more greed. The vicious cycle continues.
Part of the imbalance is caused by ignorance? also, some of those
folks with everything justify their elevated status via a "Socially
Darwinistic" frame of mind.

 
> 1. Does what I've said sound "plausible".
> 2. Can you understand it.
> 3. Is it consistent with the facts that we know
> about Religion and Science?
>

[1.] Yes

[2.] I don't fully understand the [ENPg]<-->[XYZt] transformation yet.

[3.] 3 is dependent on 2

Relevant Pages

  • Re: GOD=G_uv versus JOHN ANKERBERG
    ... Summary - there are is the objective reality - that which is and there ... The processes that determin limb growth and brain growth are weakly ... mental capability and a persons capability. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Science and God
    ... Newton's laws were just models of reality, ... Immediate perceptions are closer to reality ... Brain 1 might want ... though -- brain 1's store of experiences are physically closer to ...
    (uk.philosophy.humanism)
  • Re: An atheist professor & his student
    ... comparing that to the god question. ... acting as if my brain ... only real difference is that my apparent fellows all seem to believe ... some conflict with the consensus reality. ...
    (alt.sports.basketball.nba.la-lakers)
  • Re: Consciousness, Mind, Matter, Meaning and Information
    ... then the camera is "seeing the truth about reality". ... The brain includes a large amount of processing to try and extract reality, ... the current state of the environment from the sensory data available to it. ... This is how it tells memories, ...
    (comp.ai.philosophy)
  • Re: Perception of reality *IS* the same as reality!
    ... > Do my brain and your brain create the same reality? ... THE MAIN EFFECT OF THE GROWTH DEFICIT ... which is historically described as "GOD". ...
    (sci.physics)