Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Can Consciousness and Dark Matter Be Related


geonerd

Recommended Posts

The article below discusses dark matter spewing from the sun with each particle being more than 1/billionth the mass of an electron.

http://www.nature.co...the-sun-1.16174

This is why dark matter is so elusive. It's size is closer to the Plank scale more than any other particle.

Stuart Hammeroff of AZ State University believes consciousness is not created by the brain, but rather a receiver that receives consciousness from the quantum world. He proposes that consciousness is independent of the brain and is transmitted everywhere and is tuned in my microtubules that act like microscopic quantum computers that reside in all nerve cells in the human body and brain.

http://www.quantumconsciousness.org/

Watch his videos on youtube and decide for yourself. Here is one to start with.

[media=]

[/media]

Now take this one step further.

What if dark matter is the stuff that microtubules access to create what we call consciousness?

So when a human dies, this captured dark matter is released from the body as plank scale particles in superposition, and is responsible for NDE, ESP, precognitive abilities, ghosts, spirits, and other spooky actions at a distance, and is a necessary part of the universe required for life to exist.

Edited by geonerd
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Just a minor point, on the Topic Description line Professor Hameroff is described as a physicist. I understand he's actually an anaesthetist (anaesthesiologist for USAnians).

In any case, seeing as the video is over an hour long, can you summarise it, please?

In particular, in your last sentence you say: "So when a human dies, this captured dark matter is released from the body as plank [sic] scale particles in superposition...and is a necessary part of the universe required for life to exist." I'd appreciate if you could clarify: is the Professor linking Dark Matter to life in general, or to consciousness specifically?

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The article about dark matter is by physicists. The video is of Hameroff. Hameroff says consciousness is independent from the brain like a TV set is independent from the signal it receives. Hameroff does not make the connection to dark matter. I made that connection because Hameroff says consciousness is not measurable and is massless and is at every point all around us; and is so small that it is plank size; so small that the fabric of space is grainy and not smooth. He uses an example of waves on the ocean viewed from 40,000 feet. The ocean appears smooth even though a ship on the surface experiences choppy waves. Its a very intriguing hour.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't watched the video. And like most people with kids, I probably never will. But, are you saying that Hameroff thinks consciousness is carried on a particle? Or maybe on a wave effect?

Is he religious at all. This sounds very much like a suggestion of the Soul carrying consciousness.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, is Mr Hammeroff saying the universe is conscious and our brains are somehow channeling this consciousness? I'm not sure this is the same idea as having a 'soul' though? What sort of evidence does he propose for this being the case? This kind of sounds like one of those ideas one has to accept via faith.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stuart Hamerhoff is indeed an anaesthesiologist, not a physicist.

Hamerhoff has collaborated with noted physicist Roger Penrose on Orch-OR, which purports to give a quantum mechanical model for conciousness.

This model has been critized by other noted physicists, in particular Max Tegmark. Many biologists, chemists, neurologists, etc. have also criticized the Orch-OR model.

Hamerhoff and Penrose have (with some other supporters) attempted to address criticisms and have continued to refine and develop their model.

The topic is still controversial, there is little-to-no supporting experimental evidence, and the Orch-OR model lies well outside ``mainstream science''.

That doesn't mean it is wrong, but it is definitely a fringe belief.

I suppose it is fair to link the fringe Orch-OR model with dark matter (while dark matter itself is not fringe, there are no direct observations of dark matter), but that is even more of a reach.

In fact, connecting dark matter with Orch-OR involves dramatically redefining what dark matter is.

The only plausible mechanism for Orch-OR is electromagnetic in nature. (As I understand it, Orch-OR posits quantum entanglement between electric dipoles in microtubules, but regardless - electromagnetism is the only quantum phenomena that can plausibly operate on the Orch-OR distance and time scales.)

However the very definition of dark matter requires it to have no interactions with electromagnetism - otherwise it wouldn't be ``dark''.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The article with the physicist states that the axions are derived from dark matter and they are converted into photons. So dark matter gives rise to some photons when encountering electromagnetism. This doesn't necessarily mean all axions become photons or that dark matter becomes photons. It may just be a signature of dark matter or consciousness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Dr Hameroff is right, then since most higher animals have similar nerve cells, shouldn't we assume that most large animals are also conscious? Since we don't see signs of this in all higher animals I'd argue that consciousness is not a result of the biology of the brain, but of the way the brain is connected/wired together. Simple observation alone of animals would seem to show evidence of Dr Hameroff's theory being wrong.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Dr Hameroff is right, then since most higher animals have similar nerve cells, shouldn't we assume that most large animals are also conscious? Since we don't see signs of this in all higher animals I'd argue that consciousness is not a result of the biology of the brain, but of the way the brain is connected/wired together. Simple observation alone of animals would seem to show evidence of Dr Hameroff's theory being wrong.

Could be. But maybe all living things with microtubules in their cells have an ability to receive something. Could be the bigger the brain, the more (band width) these quantum computers access or something like that. Or maybe there are other designs that receive these signals in cells that are so small, we can't observe them yet. The universe has grown so much with the invention of space telescopes and the micro world is growing too. Just because we can't see things yet, doesn't mean they do not exist. They only exist when we observe them because there is no way to prove something exist if we can't observe it or the effects of it. Take God, or dark matter, anything that can't be explained by science at the moment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...

In the past people saw flat lands and oceans everywhere as far as their eyes could see, notwithstanding mountains. So in all logic the earth was flat.

And now we see suns and planets everywhere and so we assume that's the true nature of the universe. Oh father, you are so wrong , you just cannot see beyond the fifth element :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Very compelling.

My son and I enjoyed this the first time we saw it.

Perhaps you could try watching with your kids DC?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...
 
On 10/20/2014 at 9:40 PM, geonerd said:

Consciousness is not created by the brain, but rather a receiver that receives consciousness from the quantum world. He proposes that consciousness is independent of the brain and is transmitted everywhere and is tuned in my microtubules that act like microscopic quantum computers that reside in all nerve cells in the human body and brain.

 

What if dark matter is the stuff that microtubules access to create what we call consciousness?

Correct. Consciousness could be called a field. Consciousness has spectra, like electromagnetism.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/21/2014 at 3:28 PM, geonerd said:

maybe all living things with microtubules in their cells have an ability to receive something. Could be the bigger the brain, the more (band width) these quantum computers access

Mass provides vibration a thing to effect. Specific arrangements provide specific effects. Those affected by the spectra of consciousness receivable by neurological structures can't easily detect the spectra being received by lattice structures—for example—nor the effect it is having on those lattice structures. That is, in order to experience the consciousness intrinsic to "others," humans must attenuate. Doing so is revelatory. Not doing so is also a respectable choice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 3 weeks later...

Doesn't make sense to me ,recently there have been discoveries linking a specific part of the brain where consciousness is supposed to reside ,it's on seeker channel on YouTube.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Consciousness is linked to the brain. When certain parts of the brain is damaged, consciousness ceases. 

On 10/21/2014 at 3:40 AM, geonerd said:

Watch his videos on youtube and decide for yourself.

That is not how science is done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.