Thoughts about consciousness 2 (Science/Philosophy)

I have recently researched into time and consciousness in more detail see "Research into Time and consciousness"

I do understand that these ideas are probably not true; however they are ideas that I feel I should write down otherwise i shall forget or lose my thoughts/ideas.

If we continue on the path that our senses are extremely important to how we view the world and that the universe is actually distinguished by us individually it brought me to a second major thought.

Although we “know” that Australia exists (I am not disputing this); if we had no previous knowledge of such a place and we were never told about any of these other places we have never been; how do we know they exist.

To my knowledge we don’t until we are told or experience these places; but if you think about a test human who has never been told anything about the universe all he knows is what he can sense.

This brings me to my 2^nd point;

Your relevant universe at a certain point in time is only distinguished by your senses and how far they reach.

Now as each sense has a different range (for example you cannot touch that car which drove by your house but you can hear it). The volume of your relevant universe must be established by your farthest reaching sense, which is probably always changing.

This makes perfect sense to me; as further than your senses at any given time or “time singularity” you do not experience anything other than your senses.

Time (Science/Philosophy)

I have recently researched into time and consciousness in more detail see "Research into Time and consciousness"

I do understand that these ideas are probably not true; however they are ideas that I feel I should write down otherwise i shall forget or lose my thoughts/ideas.

When we talk about our universe we always talk about it as 4 dimensional; with 3 dimensions of Space and 1 of Time.

But I have a problem with the term “time”;

You can measure the 3 dimensions of Space in a Singularity of time; for example when time is not changing a 30cm ruler will continue being 30cm.

However to measure time we need the other dimensions.

Think about it; a stopwatch relies on movement. Any way of measuring time relies on the other 3 dimensions.

This has led me to believe whether time is only really relevant when the other 3 dimensions are changing.

For example; if I was walking down the road and every single particle (including energy-mass and just everything) stopped moving and then started moving again how would we know any difference?

We wouldn’t is the answer.

This made me think that perhaps it has happened; perhaps the world does stop in its tracks and then start again.

Now (this is getting really deep) , if we imagine that for every time it stops and starts is a separate part of time and that that part of time has a single set of dimensions for each “everything”. We call each of these points a “Time Singularity” and can be thought of much the same way as a picture; but more like a 3d picture with your own senses involved (see thoughts about consciousness). Each point of singularity may pass at any given time and it wouldn’t matter when; it is only that the “time singularity” passes on to the next that is important.

This ideal points to a world in which our own universe is just a continuous set of 3d frames which we experience through our senses; and rather than time being a 4^th dimension; it is just an affect of the other 3.

After reading this again today I am not sure whether it fits together with the more complex ideals of quantum mechanics and more specifically the uncertainty principle – however I am not sure whether the idea that we cannot record where particles are succinctly has any real relevance to my point.

If I come up with a better theory then I will amend this one in line with the uncertainty principle.

Thoughts about Consciousness (Science/Philosophy)

I have recently researched into time and consciousness in more detail see "Research into Time and consciousness"

I do understand that these ideas are probably not true; however they are ideas that I feel I should write down otherwise i shall forget or lose my thoughts/ideas.

First of all imagine a man standing on the earth; how would you describe that. Although it is logical to say the man is standing on the earth; you could also say that the man is surrounded by the Universe (If you presume that this isn’t a closed system of just earth and man but a system much like the reality we live in). So now the body of the man is the focus of the universe rather than the opposite.

Now think about you and how you perceive the world. We perceive the world through our senses, sight, touch, hearing, taste and smell. These senses make the universe relevant to us; without them the universe may as well not be there; as we cannot sense its presence so therefore it is not relevant.

Taking these thoughts into account; would it not be equally logical to say that the universe revolves around us as a single consciousness as we are the most relevant things to ourselves.

For example; when you sit down; are you sitting down; or is the universe moving up; adjusting itself to you and the way you perceive the universe.

If you close your eyes and feel air particles moving past you are not moving it is them; the universe is around your consciousness.

Another small example of how this works has played on my mind; what if you had no senses. How would the world seem them? You wouldn’t die; it’s just your relevant universe would be darkness; nothingness. Just your consciousness.

This thought did throw up some questions; the first of which to me was how do consciousnesses interact?

My conclusion was that although you are the centre of your own relevant universe; those other consciousnesses around you can indeed move through your universe in any way they wish.

The hard thing about this is that this means that there must be for every consciousness a separate relevant Universe.

On reflection though; maybe this is what a consciousness really is a personal relevant universe which surrounds you.