Did mind create matter?

[synihilist]

Hey everyone.

I'm new to this so please be lenient haha.

Basically I want opinions on the theory that mind created matter, ie everything we perceive via our senses is just a projection of our minds. Obviously that begs the question of where does the mind come from but hey, all current theories come back to that. Any ideas?

Thanks

[DNESE312]

Hmm...

Thinking about it, it would seem true to some people.

But I'd rather think not. This is similar to saying "I'm the center of this world", but hey, ask yourself. If this is your world, why can't you get whatever you want so easily?

Meh, I'm kinda new here too so.. Hehe

Just letting my opinion out.

[SlimJim22]

According to quantum mechanics no thing exists until we observe it. This is the 'observer effect'. It does support the assertion that mind creates matter but I prefer to think the two aspects are inextricably linked. One does not create the other but both are interdepenent. Duality is the nature of our reality but QM insists that paradoxes exist at the quantum level. The tao of Physics is a good book.

Maybe mind and matter are simply both forms of energy that manifest differently depending on frequency.

http://www.one-mind-one-energy.com/energy.html

[Emma_Acid]

According to quantum mechanics no thing exists until we observe it. This is the 'observer effect'.

Nope, thats a common pseudo scientific misunderstanding of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principal.

Observation doesn't create existence. What is happening is that no sub atomic particle has fixed properties until measured. Its the act of measurement, not observation, that fixes the particles properties, an effect of what happens when you try and measure something that small.

What is happening is that by measuring the particle, you are entering into a system with it - the idea of the particle having fixed properties when not part of this system is meaningless, like the idea of a rainbow if no-ones there to see it.

[Aubrienne_Ellyrias]

its all about mind over matter! "if you dont mind, it dont matter" lol idk some dude told me tht once hehe it stuck with me ever since though ahah

[Pihkal]

Nope, thats a common pseudo scientific misunderstanding of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principal.

Observation doesn't create existence. What is happening is that no sub atomic particle has fixed properties until measured. Its the act of measurement, not observation, that fixes the particles properties, an effect of what happens when you try and measure something that small.

What is happening is that by measuring the particle, you are entering into a system with it - the idea of the particle having fixed properties when not part of this system is meaningless, like the idea of a rainbow if no-ones there to see it.

You just saved me typing out exactly the same thing. Thank you.

[Rlyeh]

Hey everyone.

I'm new to this so please be lenient haha.

Basically I want opinions on the theory that mind created matter, ie everything we perceive via our senses is just a projection of our minds. Obviously that begs the question of where does the mind come from but hey, all current theories come back to that. Any ideas?

Thanks

If that was the case, no one would get cancer unless they believed they had cancer.

[SHaYap]

the zen equivalent would be :

"Is the flag moving or is the heart/mind moving ? "

The flag moves because the wind is blowing, without the wind the flag does not move, the flag is moving because the mind/heart is moved by the the movement of the flag.

[Firestone66]

According to quantum mechanics no thing exists until we observe it. This is the 'observer effect'. It does support the assertion that mind creates matter but I prefer to think the two aspects are inextricably linked. One does not create the other but both are interdepenent. Duality is the nature of our reality but QM insists that paradoxes exist at the quantum level. The tao of Physics is a good book.

Maybe mind and matter are simply both forms of energy that manifest differently depending on frequency.

http://www.one-mind-one-energy.com/energy.html

I like your post, it is interesting, in the sense that they are one and not impartial. Mind and soul are one in the same, or maybe that is a different topic, but let's just say mind and soul are the same for arguments sake. The would imply that everything in existence has a soul, since matter and mind travel equally as one through existence. As physics does not discriminate.

[Cybele]

Basically I want opinions on the theory that mind created matter, ie everything we perceive via our senses is just a projection of our minds. Obviously that begs the question of where does the mind come from but hey, all current theories come back to that. Any ideas?

I assume you include other people among the things which are considered projections of the mind?

This sounds like a philosophical position known as "metaphysical solipsism".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphysical_solipsism

Edited February 15, 2011 by Cybele

[Emma_Acid]

I like your post, it is interesting, in the sense that they are one and not impartial. Mind and soul are one in the same, or maybe that is a different topic, but let's just say mind and soul are the same for arguments sake. The would imply that everything in existence has a soul, since matter and mind travel equally as one through existence. As physics does not discriminate.

That's not physics.

[SHaYap]

That's not physics.

metaphysics perhaps ?

[8th_wall]

I feel more and more inclined to think that these sort of questions can't really be completely discussed. A different form of communication that extends language is required.

But anyway, I would probably be inclined to think that that which "IS" is being discovered by observation.

Edited February 15, 2011 by PsiSeeker

[StarMountainKid]

What happens when we look at something? The brain creates an image and offers it into our consciousness. This image in the mind does not exist as the thing we are looking at. What we are looking at is atoms, molecules and electromagnetic radiation. For instance, there is no 'color' existing outside of our mind, no 'light' as we comprehend it. Raw matter and energy is a orderly chaos of fundamental particles and forces. The mind creates its own order out of this raw physical existence.

But still there must exist this phenomena 'outside' the mind for it to organize as a recognizable mental image.

So, fundamentally there only exists raw phenomena until we observe and organize it into recognizable patterns. The mind creates these patterns, so in this sense, we do create the world around us, but only in our minds.

[SHaYap]

in other word :

a universe of pixels on a screen in front of us and all we see are arguments

[Francisco Fidalgo]

According to quantum mechanics no thing exists until we observe it.

When my old high school teacher told me that I asked why blind people can interact with matter then

Edited February 15, 2011 by Francisco Fidalgo

[Leonardo]

Hey everyone.

I'm new to this so please be lenient haha.

Basically I want opinions on the theory that mind created matter, ie everything we perceive via our senses is just a projection of our minds. Obviously that begs the question of where does the mind come from but hey, all current theories come back to that. Any ideas?

Thanks

A few questions to consider:

1) What would mind create matter from?

2) If 1) = "the matter is illusiory", then what does mind exist in?

3) Do you propose more than one mind?

4) If 3) = Yes, then why does the measurement of matter created by different minds produce identical results?

5) If 3) = No, then how is this different to various current religious beliefs?

Edited February 15, 2011 by Leonardo

[Emma_Acid]

metaphysics perhaps ?

Metaphysics is philosophy and has nothing to do with actual physics.

When my old high school teacher told me that I asked why blind people can interact with matter then

Because as I say, its a complete misreading of the theory.

[SHaYap]

Metaphysics is philosophy and has nothing to do with actual physics.

what happens when physics research crosses the line into observations of reality / philosophy ?

[Emma_Acid]

what happens when physics research crosses the line into observations of reality / philosophy ?

I don't know. I'm not a fan of philosophy to be honest. What I am trying to get at that the popular philosophical take on physics is wrong.

[Drayno]

what happens when physics research crosses the line into observations of reality / philosophy ?

Then the spawn shall be a beautiful b******.

Metaphysics: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphysics_%28Aristotle%29

Aristotle's Metaphysics is considered a predecessor to contemporary Natural Science.

I would highly advocate reading them. The work is divided into fourteen 'books', each one pertaining to a different subject. For example, the first 'book' is called Book Alpha: The Theory of Explanation. It is divided into ten sub-sections, describing different aspects from 'The Nature and Goal of Wisdom' to 'Early Views of Materials, Movement, and Good'. Whereas 'book' eight: 'Book Eta: The Unity of Matter and Form' is more so relevant to our issues, the division of matter and mind, and how we perceive both.

Since I have a physical copy of all of the fourteen 'books', I shall refer to it.

Metaphysics: Book Eta, page 170, Line Eight, Sentence Two.

"A subject matter is primary being in one of three ways: it may be a material (and I mean by material whatever, though it is not a this-something or an individual, can become one); or it may be the formula or the shape, which, being a this-something, can have its own separate being only logically; or it may be the synthesis of these, which alone is generated and destroyed and is in an unqualified sense a separate being. "

[SHaYap]

I don't know. I'm not a fan of philosophy to be honest. What I am trying to get at that the popular philosophical take on physics is wrong.

I do not disagree... but the OP asked for some leeway, I only attempted to offer some

Then the spawn shall be a beautiful b******.

Metaphysics: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphysics_%28Aristotle%29

Aristotle's Metaphysics is considered a predecessor to contemporary Natural Science.

I would highly advocate reading them. The work is divided into fourteen 'books', each one pertaining to a different subject. For example, the first 'book' is called Book Alpha: The Theory of Explanation. It is divided into ten sub-sections, describing different aspects from 'The Nature and Goal of Wisdom' to 'Early Views of Materials, Movement, and Good'. Whereas 'book' eight: 'Book Eta: The Unity of Matter and Form' is more so relevant to our issues, the division of matter and mind, and how we perceive both.

Since I have a physical copy of all of the fourteen 'books', I shall refer to it.

Metaphysics: Book Eta, page 170, Line Eight, Sentence Two.

"A subject matter is primary being in one of three ways: it may be a material (and I mean by material whatever, though it is not a this-something or an individual, can become one); or it may be the formula or the shape, which, being a this-something, can have its own separate being only logically; or it may be the synthesis of these, which alone is generated and destroyed and is in an unqualified sense a separate being. "

I have a few of those too, read some, mostly well over my head

here is an extensive library available online

[Drayno]

I do not disagree... but the OP asked for some leeway, I only attempted to offer some

I have a few of those too, read some, mostly well over my head

here is an extensive library available online

Thanks for the link, mate. I will definitely check out some of the offerings it has.

[woopypooky]

When my old high school teacher told me that I asked why blind people can interact with matter then

observing is not just with the eyes, sound and touch feel also can be used to observe.

[wirelessguru1]

Matter, which is a form of energy, cannot be either created or destroyed...

It can only change forms.

But mind (a program) can and, of course, does change the form of matter.