Metaphysics - Science and the Superphysical

[psyche101]

10 hours ago, papageorge1 said:

Bernardo Kastrup wrote a compelling description of what human physiology might look like in 10 dimension:

"According to different versions of String Theory, and especially M-Theory, up to 10 dimensions of space are required for describing and explaining the behavior of matter. For years now popular culture has acknowledged this abstraction with a certain degree of wonder, thanks to the likes of Brian Greene and other science popularizers. Yet, there is one remarkable implication of these theories that seem to escape the attention of most of us: If matter exists in 10 spatial dimensions, then our bodies, which are made of matter, also fundamentally exist in 10 spatial dimensions. So the 3-dimensional body we see when we look down while dressing up each day is, in fact, a flattened projection of a 10-dimensional structure way beyond our ability to visualize spatially. ... How many structures are lost when we project a 10-dimensional body onto only 3 dimensions? How many 'organ systems' become completely invisible? How many complex, vital structures inherent to the inner-workings of a living body disappear in the projection? Going from 3 to 2 dimensions, as we all know, implies significant loss of information; and that is just the loss of a single dimension. Imagine the loss of 7 dimensions."

 

Our minds conditioned by the three dimensional world asks where are these so-called chakras, astral bodies, etc. claimed by many with extra-sensitive psychic (beyond three-dimensional) senses. There is theorizing going on already (string theory) that shows some ability to address these so-called super-natural things.

I suspect we are seeing the dawn of the next centuries of science.

Thoughts? I know these things are all theoretical and not testable at this time. But as I've suspected for some time now, I believe these so-called paranormal Unexplained Mysteries do involve 'real' things we don't understand. I hold this to be the strongest and most reasonable theory out there.

Thoughts? 

I think you still don't understand science. You seem to have this Chopra thing going on.

Edited December 6, 2019 by Saru
Removed derogatory personal remark

[papageorge1]

28 minutes ago, Piney said:

It was a me to him statement concerning a previous teaching discussion and none of your business. 

 

Ahh, then you shouldn’t have mentioned it in a quote TO ME!

[papageorge1]

6 hours ago, psyche101 said:

Thoughts? 

I think you still don't understand science. You seem to have this Chopra thing going on.

You showed YOU don’t understand. They only SEEM hidden to us with only three-dimensional senses. 

[psyche101]

5 hours ago, papageorge1 said:

You showed YOU don’t understand. They only SEEM hidden to us with only three-dimensional senses. 

Yeah. 

As if there's an organ working in the body that we can't see.

Edited December 6, 2019 by Saru
Removed derogatory personal remark

[papageorge1]

5 hours ago, psyche101 said:

Yeah. 

As if there's an organ working in the body that we can't see.

One example is the Chakra system described in detail since ancient times. 

[The Eternal Flame]

6 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

One example is the Chakra system described in detail since ancient times. 

Chakra is distorded by watever they is in the auric field.

 

[papageorge1]

21 minutes ago, The Eternal Flame said:

Chakra is distorded by watever they is in the auric field.

 

Interesting, but That @psyche101 person was saying there’s no such thing as chakra at all. Period.

And no such silly things as auras and auric fields. Never mind if you are one of those that claims you can see them. You have to be imagining things then.

Edited December 6, 2019 by papageorge1

[psyche101]

2 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

Interesting, but That @psyche101 person was saying there’s no such thing as chakra at all. Period.

That's right. There's not. It's just woo mumbo jumbo.

It's supposed to be energy points right? What sort of energy is it?

[papageorge1]

23 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

That's right. There's not. It's just woo mumbo jumbo.

It's supposed to be energy points right? What sort of energy is it?

prana/qi.

[psyche101]

4 hours ago, papageorge1 said:

prana/qi.

Can't you translate that?

Prana is supposedly inward moving energy and qi is allegedly energy flow.

So that doesn't answer the question does it?

Edited December 6, 2019 by Saru
Removed derogatory personal remark

[onlookerofmayhem]

4 hours ago, psyche101 said:

Can't you translate that?

Prana is supposedly inward moving energy and qi is allegedly energy flow.

So that doesn't answer the question does it?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Force

It's midichlorians.

[papageorge1]

12 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

Can't you translate that?

Prana is supposedly inward moving energy and qi is allegedly energy flow.

So that doesn't answer the question does it?

Don't you even understand the woo you peddle?

prana

[ˈpränə]

NOUN

hinduism

1. breath, considered as a life-giving force.

   "prana is seen as a universal energy which flows in currents in and around the body"

[John from Lowell]

4 hours ago, papageorge1 said:

You showed YOU don’t understand. They only SEEM hidden to us with only three-dimensional senses. 

Hi,

More than 3D senses, for many of us we can not get past 3D reasoning restrictions. The human intellect needs to be trained to comprehend multidimensional realities. That can not begin to happen without compassion for self and others.

Science has its technical proof for these conclusions. Some of us have our personal proof which can never get validated for those who want to fit multidimensional reality into 3D.

John

 

[Rlyeh]

12 minutes ago, John from Lowell said:

Hi,

More than 3D senses, for many of us we can not get past 3D reasoning restrictions. The human intellect needs to be trained to comprehend multidimensional realities. That can not begin to happen without compassion for self and others.

Science has its technical proof for these conclusions. Some of us have our personal proof which can never get validated for those who want to fit multidimensional reality into 3D.

John

You can't get past 3D without associating it with magic.

[Rlyeh]

9 hours ago, papageorge1 said:

Bernardo Kastrup wrote a compelling description of what human physiology might look like in 10 dimension:

"According to different versions of String Theory, and especially M-Theory, up to 10 dimensions of space are required for describing and explaining the behavior of matter. For years now popular culture has acknowledged this abstraction with a certain degree of wonder, thanks to the likes of Brian Greene and other science popularizers. Yet, there is one remarkable implication of these theories that seem to escape the attention of most of us: If matter exists in 10 spatial dimensions, then our bodies, which are made of matter, also fundamentally exist in 10 spatial dimensions. So the 3-dimensional body we see when we look down while dressing up each day is, in fact, a flattened projection of a 10-dimensional structure way beyond our ability to visualize spatially. ... How many structures are lost when we project a 10-dimensional body onto only 3 dimensions? How many 'organ systems' become completely invisible? How many complex, vital structures inherent to the inner-workings of a living body disappear in the projection? Going from 3 to 2 dimensions, as we all know, implies significant loss of information; and that is just the loss of a single dimension. Imagine the loss of 7 dimensions."

If matter is 10 dimensional, classical physics shouldn't work.  

[+Not A Rockstar]

3 minutes ago, Rlyeh said:

If matter is 10 dimensional, classical physics shouldn't work.  

As a mental exercise it boggles. If we do have 10d out there, is physics as we understand it today simply how it acts in 3d because that is what we perceive? idk.

[Rlyeh]

7 minutes ago, Not A Rockstar said:

As a mental exercise it boggles. If we do have 10d out there, is physics as we understand it today simply how it acts in 3d because that is what we perceive? idk.

Any collisions along these hidden 7 dimensions should affect objects in the same way collisions between 3d objects as seen in 2d.

[psyche101]

3 hours ago, papageorge1 said:

prana

[ˈpränə]

 

NOUN

hinduism

1. breath, considered as a life-giving force.

   "prana is seen as a universal energy which flows in currents in and around the body"

That's a claimed cosmic energy in 'everything' which 'flow's inward', not body energy and is still not answering the original question.

You don't even know the original Sanskrit meaning do you? You think it's that multi coloured new age BS I take it from your evasive and ambiguous reply?

What sort of energy is it? As in:

How is it measured, what are the units, how is flow achieved?

Your just using buzz words to avoid the question.

Edited December 6, 2019 by Saru
Removed derogatory personal remark

[psyche101]

10 minutes ago, Not A Rockstar said:

As a mental exercise it boggles. If we do have 10d out there, is physics as we understand it today simply how it acts in 3d because that is what we perceive? idk.

It's at a subatomic level, it's not relevant to macro existence.

Sort of like looking at a field of grass from a distance. Looks green and inviting, but up close it's riddled with weeds, patchy and past your knees.

[Saru]

Thread cleaned

Let's keep it civil please folks - if you have to resort to personally insulting another poster then you've already lost the argument.

[+Not A Rockstar]

1 hour ago, psyche101 said:

It's at a subatomic level, it's not relevant to macro existence.

Sort of like looking at a field of grass from a distance. Looks green and inviting, but up close it's riddled with weeds, patchy and past your knees.

What IS 10d anyway? Is it even physical? I find trying to describe 4 or 5d hard enough, what IS 10d?

[papageorge1]

5 hours ago, Rlyeh said:

If matter is 10 dimensional, classical physics shouldn't work.  

Classical physics works well at the macroscopic level. Classical physics doesn't work at the subatomic level  where mysterious quantum physics best explains things. Perhaps when extra-dimensions effect the 3-dimensional macroscopic world we have what we call 'paranormal' activity.  

[Rlyeh]

4 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

Classical physics works well at the macroscopic level. Classical physics doesn't work at the subatomic level  where mysterious quantum physics best explains things. Perhaps when extra-dimensions effect the 3-dimensional macroscopic world we have what we call 'paranormal' activity.  

So your hidden organs are microscopic?

[Orphalesion]

11 hours ago, papageorge1 said:

Let’s see Orphie explain it then.

Sorry I was asleep and at work.
But Piney explained it in his post to me. Invisible, untouchable overlay that's still part of THIS world, as opposed to being a separate "World" like the Norse imagined with the nine worlds of Yggdrasil or some streams of New Age try to sell their "Dimensions"   

[zep73]

13 hours ago, papageorge1 said:

The difference between a theory and a hypothesis is not important to this discussion.

It is, if you seek scientific validation to your "spiritual agenda". A hypothesis does not confirm anything, only theories does. But, to this date, science has only contributed to debunk spiritual claims, not verify any.

Quote

I’ll keep my point about quite the number of serious minds taking it very seriously today.

Apparently you’re not a fan.

There isn't really any high profile scientists who still defend the string hypothesis anymore. If I'm wrong, please prove it. Show me recent statements from them.

As you may know, my favorite theory of the world/universe is that it's virtual. String "theory" provides evidence to that, so for me it's kind of a loss. But I accept it, because of its shortcomings, and lack of scientific support. Now, the only evidence I have left, is duality and non-locality. It's not proof, but it's still evidence.
That's how you can trust that I'm not biased. I respect the evidence, no matter what it tells us. Even if it goes against my preferred theories.