Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Life after death: Dr Stuart Hameroff

Expand Messages
  • Anna
    Near-death experiences occur when the soul leaves the nervous system and enters the universe, claim two quantum physics experts a.. Ground-breaking theory
    Message 1 of 18 , Nov 1, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
       
       

      Near-death experiences occur when the soul leaves the nervous system and enters the universe, claim two quantum physics experts
      • Ground-breaking theory holds that quantum substances form the soul
      • They are part of the fundamental structure of the universe

      By DAMIEN GAYLE

      PUBLISHED: 10:38 GMT, 30 October 2012 | UPDATED: 11:26 GMT, 30 October 2012


      Life after death: Dr Stuart Hameroff, Professor Emeritus at the University of Arizona, advanced the theory on a television documentary

      Life after death: Dr Stuart Hameroff, Professor Emeritus at the University of Arizona, advanced the theory on a television documentary


      A near-death experience happens when quantum substances which form the soul leave the nervous system and enter the universe at large, according to a remarkable theory proposed by two eminent scientists.

      According to this idea, consciousness is a program for a quantum computer in the brain which can persist in the universe even after death, explaining the perceptions of those who have near-death experiences.

      Dr Stuart Hameroff, Professor Emeritus at the Departments of Anesthesiology and Psychology and the Director of the Centre of Consciousness Studies at the University of Arizona, has advanced the quasi-religious theory.

      It is based on a quantum theory of consciousness he and British physicist Sir Roger Penrose have developed which holds that the essence of our soul is contained inside structures called microtubules within brain cells.

      They have argued that our experience of consciousness is the result of quantum gravity effects in these microtubules, a theory which they dubbed orchestrated objective reduction (Orch-OR).

      Thus it is held that our souls are more than the interaction of neurons in the brain. They are in fact constructed from the very fabric of the universe - and may have existed since the beginning of time.

      The concept is similar to the Buddhist and Hindu belief that consciousness is an integral part of the universe - and indeed that it is really all there may be, a position similar to Western philosophical idealism.

      With these beliefs, Dr Hameroff holds that in a near-death experience the microtubules lose their quantum state, but the information within them is not destroyed. Instead it merely leaves the body and returns to the cosmos.

      Shocked back to life: The theory holds that when patients have a near death experience their quantum soul is released from the body and re-enters the cosmos, before returning when they are revived

      Shocked back to life: The theory holds that when patients have a near death experience their quantum soul is released from the body and re-enters the cosmos, before returning when they are revived

      Dr Hameroff told the Science Channel's Through the Wormhole documentary: 'Let's say the heart stops beating, the blood stops flowing, the microtubules lose their quantum state.

      'The quantum information within the microtubules is not destroyed, it can't be destroyed, it just distributes and dissipates to the universe at large.

      'If the patient is resuscitated, revived, this quantum information can go back into the microtubules and the patient says "I had a near death experience".'

      He adds: 'If they're not revived, and the patient dies, it's possible that this quantum information can exist outside the body, perhaps indefinitely, as a soul.'

      Evidence: Dr Hameroff believes new findings about the role quantum physics plays in biological processes, such as the navigation of birds, will one day prove his theory

      Evidence: Dr Hameroff believes new findings about the role quantum physics plays in biological processes, such as the navigation of birds, will one day prove his theory

      The Orch-OR theory has come in for heavy criticism by more empirically minded thinkers and remains controversial among the scientific community.

      MIT physicist Max Tegmark is just one of the many scientists to have challenged it, in a 2000 paper that is widely cited by opponents, the Huffington Post reports.

      Nevertheless, Dr Hameroff believes that research in to quantum physics is beginning to validate Orch-Or, with quantum effects recently being shown to support many important biological processes, such as smell, bird navigation and photosynthesis"

    • mark hubey
      That is truly amazing! Wow! They were having so much fun having so much fun speculating about Quantum Mechanics which is so mysterious! They must be having
      Message 2 of 18 , Nov 1, 2012
      • 0 Attachment
        That is truly amazing! Wow! They were having so much fun having so much fun speculating about Quantum Mechanics which is so mysterious! They must be having even more fun now, judging from his facial expression :-)

        They are working on deep problems of the universe. In truth, I cannot tell if they know how to understand fractions ! I cannot even tell if they really understand fractions. Of course, I am not talking about Penrose. He knows a lot more than fractions, much more.


        On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 7:43 PM, Anna <pantheon@...> wrote:
         

         
         

        Near-death experiences occur when the soul leaves the nervous system and enters the universe, claim two quantum physics experts
        • Ground-breaking theory holds that quantum substances form the soul
        • They are part of the fundamental structure of the universe

        By DAMIEN GAYLE

        PUBLISHED: 10:38 GMT, 30 October 2012 | UPDATED: 11:26 GMT, 30 October 2012


        Life after death: Dr Stuart Hameroff, Professor Emeritus at the University of Arizona, advanced the theory on a television documentary

        Life after death: Dr Stuart Hameroff, Professor Emeritus at the University of Arizona, advanced the theory on a television documentary


        A near-death experience happens when quantum substances which form the soul leave the nervous system and enter the universe at large, according to a remarkable theory proposed by two eminent scientists.

        According to this idea, consciousness is a program for a quantum computer in the brain which can persist in the universe even after death, explaining the perceptions of those who have near-death experiences.

        Dr Stuart Hameroff, Professor Emeritus at the Departments of Anesthesiology and Psychology and the Director of the Centre of Consciousness Studies at the University of Arizona, has advanced the quasi-religious theory.

        It is based on a quantum theory of consciousness he and British physicist Sir Roger Penrose have developed which holds that the essence of our soul is contained inside structures called microtubules within brain cells.

        They have argued that our experience of consciousness is the result of quantum gravity effects in these microtubules, a theory which they dubbed orchestrated objective reduction (Orch-OR).

        Thus it is held that our souls are more than the interaction of neurons in the brain. They are in fact constructed from the very fabric of the universe - and may have existed since the beginning of time.

        The concept is similar to the Buddhist and Hindu belief that consciousness is an integral part of the universe - and indeed that it is really all there may be, a position similar to Western philosophical idealism.

        With these beliefs, Dr Hameroff holds that in a near-death experience the microtubules lose their quantum state, but the information within them is not destroyed. Instead it merely leaves the body and returns to the cosmos.

        Shocked back to life: The theory holds that when patients have a near death experience their quantum soul is released from the body and re-enters the cosmos, before returning when they are revived

        Shocked back to life: The theory holds that when patients have a near death experience their quantum soul is released from the body and re-enters the cosmos, before returning when they are revived

        Dr Hameroff told the Science Channel's Through the Wormhole documentary: 'Let's say the heart stops beating, the blood stops flowing, the microtubules lose their quantum state.

        'The quantum information within the microtubules is not destroyed, it can't be destroyed, it just distributes and dissipates to the universe at large.

        'If the patient is resuscitated, revived, this quantum information can go back into the microtubules and the patient says "I had a near death experience".'

        He adds: 'If they're not revived, and the patient dies, it's possible that this quantum information can exist outside the body, perhaps indefinitely, as a soul.'

        Evidence: Dr Hameroff believes new findings about the role quantum physics plays in biological processes, such as the navigation of birds, will one day prove his theory

        Evidence: Dr Hameroff believes new findings about the role quantum physics plays in biological processes, such as the navigation of birds, will one day prove his theory

        The Orch-OR theory has come in for heavy criticism by more empirically minded thinkers and remains controversial among the scientific community.

        MIT physicist Max Tegmark is just one of the many scientists to have challenged it, in a 2000 paper that is widely cited by opponents, the Huffington Post reports.

        Nevertheless, Dr Hameroff believes that research in to quantum physics is beginning to validate Orch-Or, with quantum effects recently being shown to support many important biological processes, such as smell, bird navigation and photosynthesis"




        --
        Regards,
        Mark Hubey

        "Learning to think in mathematical terms is an essential part of becoming a liberally educated person. "
        -- Kenyon College Math Department Web Page 


      • Nils K.
        Hi All! Anna, this message is extremely interesting. Thanks a lot. Paranormal events, paranormal observations, are not contradicting any known physical
        Message 3 of 18 , Nov 2, 2012
        • 0 Attachment
          Hi All!

          Anna, this message is extremely interesting. Thanks a lot.

          Paranormal events, paranormal observations, are not contradicting
          any known physical equations ("natural laws").

          When the greatest mediums of the world (Lena Ranehag, Gro Helen Toerum, Lilly Bendris, Debra Borgen, Colin Fry, Lisa Williams,
          etc, etc.) are working, the souls are contacting the mediums(not
          vice versa). People absolutely unknown to the medium are randomly
          contacting the mediums to communicate with their dead family
          members, for example. The souls are then communicating with the
          living ones via the mediums. Therefore the name MEDIUM. The medium
          is totally passive in these events. The child, for example, is now
          in contact, via the medium, with, for example, the soul of her
          dead mother. Information (for example crazy details and events that
          only the specific child know about is now coming up, proving for
          the child ansolutely beyond doubt that her mother is THERE contacting
          her child. The special information is often of such a character
          that we are speaking of events that only can have happened once
          in the history of humankind, namely this time. Bluff and
          psychology are totally ruled out.

          The medium gift is genetic and runs in families. I'm so lucky to
          have inside information about mediums. But this forum is not the
          right place to inform about THE OTHER SIDE and the MEDIUMS of the
          world.

          Thanks to a lot of TV series showing directly paranormal events,
          the public now is being wonderfully updated on THE OTHER SIDE,
          MEDIUMS, haunted houses, hounted buildings, haunted
          places ,poltergaists, and all the other paranormal observations
          we do experience.

          Best,
          NKO
        • Wade
          That intelligent men of the calibre of Penrose can believe such fantasy twaddle astounds me. That Nils laps it up comes as no surprise whatsoever sadly.
          Message 4 of 18 , Nov 2, 2012
          • 0 Attachment
            That intelligent men of the calibre of Penrose can believe such fantasy twaddle astounds me.  That Nils laps it up comes as no surprise whatsoever sadly.

            On 3 November 2012 06:18, Nils K. <n-oeij@...> wrote:
             


            Hi All!

            Anna, this message is extremely interesting. Thanks a lot.

            Paranormal events, paranormal observations, are not contradicting
            any known physical equations ("natural laws").

            When the greatest mediums of the world (Lena Ranehag, Gro Helen Toerum, Lilly Bendris, Debra Borgen, Colin Fry, Lisa Williams,
            etc, etc.) are working, the souls are contacting the mediums(not
            vice versa). People absolutely unknown to the medium are randomly
            contacting the mediums to communicate with their dead family
            members, for example. The souls are then communicating with the
            living ones via the mediums. Therefore the name MEDIUM. The medium
            is totally passive in these events. The child, for example, is now
            in contact, via the medium, with, for example, the soul of her
            dead mother. Information (for example crazy details and events that
            only the specific child know about is now coming up, proving for
            the child ansolutely beyond doubt that her mother is THERE contacting
            her child. The special information is often of such a character
            that we are speaking of events that only can have happened once
            in the history of humankind, namely this time. Bluff and
            psychology are totally ruled out.

            The medium gift is genetic and runs in families. I'm so lucky to
            have inside information about mediums. But this forum is not the
            right place to inform about THE OTHER SIDE and the MEDIUMS of the
            world.

            Thanks to a lot of TV series showing directly paranormal events,
            the public now is being wonderfully updated on THE OTHER SIDE,
            MEDIUMS, haunted houses, hounted buildings, haunted
            places ,poltergaists, and all the other paranormal observations
            we do experience.

            Best,
            NKO


          • Anna
            I think it is equally unintelligent to claim that it is a twaddle. How can you know it? Fact is that some things we just do not know. Perhaps Penrose is
            Message 5 of 18 , Nov 3, 2012
            • 0 Attachment
              I think it is equally unintelligent to claim that it is a twaddle. How  can you know it?
              Fact is that some things we just do not know.  Perhaps Penrose is right, perhaps he is wrong. If he is right, we  will have a chance to confirm it after we die.
              Anna
               
              From: Wade
              Sent: Saturday, November 03, 2012 12:29 AM
              Subject: Re: [evol-psych] Re: Life after death: Dr Stuart Hameroff
               
               

              That intelligent men of the calibre of Penrose can believe such fantasy twaddle astounds me.  That Nils laps it up comes as no surprise whatsoever sadly.

              On 3 November 2012 06:18, Nils K. <n-oeij@...> wrote:
               


              Hi All!

              Anna, this message is extremely interesting. Thanks a lot.

              Paranormal events, paranormal observations, are not contradicting
              any known physical equations ("natural laws").

              When the greatest mediums of the world (Lena Ranehag, Gro Helen Toerum, Lilly Bendris, Debra Borgen, Colin Fry, Lisa Williams,
              etc, etc.) are working, the souls are contacting the mediums(not
              vice versa). People absolutely unknown to the medium are randomly
              contacting the mediums to communicate with their dead family
              members, for example. The souls are then communicating with the
              living ones via the mediums. Therefore the name MEDIUM. The medium
              is totally passive in these events. The child, for example, is now
              in contact, via the medium, with, for example, the soul of her
              dead mother. Information (for example crazy details and events that
              only the specific child know about is now coming up, proving for
              the child ansolutely beyond doubt that her mother is THERE contacting
              her child. The special information is often of such a character
              that we are speaking of events that only can have happened once
              in the history of humankind, namely this time. Bluff and
              psychology are totally ruled out.

              The medium gift is genetic and runs in families. I'm so lucky to
              have inside information about mediums. But this forum is not the
              right place to inform about THE OTHER SIDE and the MEDIUMS of the
              world.

              Thanks to a lot of TV series showing directly paranormal events,
              the public now is being wonderfully updated on THE OTHER SIDE,
              MEDIUMS, haunted houses, hounted buildings, haunted
              places ,poltergaists, and all the other paranormal observations
              we do experience.

              Best,
              NKO


            • Don Zimmerman
              ... DWZ: All reports of miraculous events can be subjected to a simple test suggested originally, I believe, by David Hume. You first assess the likelihood
              Message 6 of 18 , Nov 3, 2012
              • 0 Attachment
                --- In evolutionary-psychology@yahoogroups.com, Wade <wmaillist@...> wrote:

                > That intelligent men of the calibre of Penrose can believe such fantasy
                > twaddle astounds me. That Nils laps it up comes as no surprise whatsoever
                > sadly.


                DWZ:
                All reports of miraculous events can be subjected to a simple test suggested originally, I believe, by David Hume. You first assess the likelihood that the remarkabe event actually occurred, which usually would mean that basic laws of physics involving gravitation, momentum, etc., were violated. Next, you assess the likelihood that the event did not occur, that is, that the report was inaccurate or fraudulent, the reporter was self-serving, running a scam, insane, whatever.

                Almost without exception the second probability would exceed the first. A similar principle might be applied to a report such as the present case. What is the probability that Penrose actually believes this fantasy? And what is the probability that the report about Penrose believing it is inaccurate? Assessing probabilities no doubt is difficult, but I know where my bet lies!

                Best regards,

                Donald W. Zimmerman
                Vancouver, BC, Canada
                dwzimm@...
                http://www3.telus.net/public/a7a828
              • mark hubey
                Wasn t there some report that it takes no energy to encode quantum bits but that energy is required only to erase the bits? That was in response to quantum
                Message 7 of 18 , Nov 3, 2012
                • 0 Attachment
                  Wasn't there some report that it takes no energy to encode quantum bits but that energy is required
                  only to erase the bits? That was in response to quantum computation (to speed up today's computers). It looks like now, it takes energy to eradicate those memories from human microtubules. It must be expensive to get to the other side.


                  On Sat, Nov 3, 2012 at 12:40 PM, Don Zimmerman <dwzimm@...> wrote:
                   

                  --- In evolutionary-psychology@yahoogroups.com, Wade <wmaillist@...> wrote:

                  > That intelligent men of the calibre of Penrose can believe such fantasy
                  > twaddle astounds me. That Nils laps it up comes as no surprise whatsoever
                  > sadly.

                  DWZ:
                  All reports of miraculous events can be subjected to a simple test suggested originally, I believe, by David Hume. You first assess the likelihood that the remarkabe event actually occurred, which usually would mean that basic laws of physics involving gravitation, momentum, etc., were violated. Next, you assess the likelihood that the event did not occur, that is, that the report was inaccurate or fraudulent, the reporter was self-serving, running a scam, insane, whatever.

                  Almost without exception the second probability would exceed the first. A similar principle might be applied to a report such as the present case. What is the probability that Penrose actually believes this fantasy? And what is the probability that the report about Penrose believing it is inaccurate? Assessing probabilities no doubt is difficult, but I know where my bet lies!

                  Best regards,

                  Donald W. Zimmerman
                  Vancouver, BC, Canada
                  dwzimm@...
                  http://www3.telus.net/public/a7a828




                  --
                  Regards,
                  Mark Hubey

                  "Learning to think in mathematical terms is an essential part of becoming a liberally educated person. "
                  -- Kenyon College Math Department Web Page 


                • Anna
                  Sure, it takes your whole life. Anna From: mark hubey Sent: Saturday, November 03, 2012 8:17 PM To: Evol
                  Message 8 of 18 , Nov 3, 2012
                  • 0 Attachment
                    <It must be expensive to get to the other side.>
                     
                    Sure, it takes your whole  life.
                    Anna
                     
                    Sent: Saturday, November 03, 2012 8:17 PM
                    To: Evol
                    Subject: Re: [evol-psych] Re: Life after death: Dr Stuart Hameroff
                     
                     

                    Wasn't there some report that it takes no energy to encode quantum bits but that energy is required

                    only to erase the bits? That was in response to quantum computation (to speed up today's computers). It looks like now, it takes energy to eradicate those memories from human microtubules. It must be expensive to get to the other side.


                    On Sat, Nov 3, 2012 at 12:40 PM, Don Zimmerman <dwzimm@...> wrote:
                     

                    --- In mailto:evolutionary-psychology%40yahoogroups.com, Wade <wmaillist@...> wrote:

                    > That intelligent men of the calibre of Penrose can believe such fantasy
                    > twaddle astounds me. That Nils laps it up comes as no surprise whatsoever
                    > sadly.

                    DWZ:
                    All reports of miraculous events can be subjected to a simple test suggested originally, I believe, by David Hume. You first assess the likelihood that the remarkabe event actually occurred, which usually would mean that basic laws of physics involving gravitation, momentum, etc., were violated. Next, you assess the likelihood that the event did not occur, that is, that the report was inaccurate or fraudulent, the reporter was self-serving, running a scam, insane, whatever.

                    Almost without exception the second probability would exceed the first. A similar principle might be applied to a report such as the present case. What is the probability that Penrose actually believes this fantasy? And what is the probability that the report about Penrose believing it is inaccurate? Assessing probabilities no doubt is difficult, but I know where my bet lies!

                    Best regards,

                    Donald W. Zimmerman
                    Vancouver, BC, Canada
                    mailto:dwzimm%40telus.net
                    http://www3.telus.net/public/a7a828



                     
                    --
                    Regards,
                    Mark Hubey
                     
                    "Learning to think in mathematical terms is an essential part of becoming a liberally educated person. "
                    -- Kenyon College Math Department Web Page
                     
                     
                  • mark hubey
                    Well, it kind of opposes Szilard who said something like You cannot get anything for nothing, not even an observation to restate the SEcond Law of
                    Message 9 of 18 , Nov 4, 2012
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Well, it kind of opposes Szilard who said something like "You cannot get anything for nothing, not even an observation" to restate the SEcond Law of Thermodynamics. It looks like knowledge/information is free but losing it costs. 


                      On Sun, Nov 4, 2012 at 1:58 AM, Anna <pantheon@...> wrote:
                       

                      <It must be expensive to get to the other side.>
                       
                      Sure, it takes your whole  life.
                      Anna
                       
                      Sent: Saturday, November 03, 2012 8:17 PM
                      To: Evol
                      Subject: Re: [evol-psych] Re: Life after death: Dr Stuart Hameroff
                       
                       

                      Wasn't there some report that it takes no energy to encode quantum bits but that energy is required

                      only to erase the bits? That was in response to quantum computation (to speed up today's computers). It looks like now, it takes energy to eradicate those memories from human microtubules. It must be expensive to get to the other side.


                      On Sat, Nov 3, 2012 at 12:40 PM, Don Zimmerman <dwzimm@...> wrote:
                       

                      --- In mailto:evolutionary-psychology%40yahoogroups.com, Wade <wmaillist@...> wrote:

                      > That intelligent men of the calibre of Penrose can believe such fantasy
                      > twaddle astounds me. That Nils laps it up comes as no surprise whatsoever
                      > sadly.

                      DWZ:
                      All reports of miraculous events can be subjected to a simple test suggested originally, I believe, by David Hume. You first assess the likelihood that the remarkabe event actually occurred, which usually would mean that basic laws of physics involving gravitation, momentum, etc., were violated. Next, you assess the likelihood that the event did not occur, that is, that the report was inaccurate or fraudulent, the reporter was self-serving, running a scam, insane, whatever.

                      Almost without exception the second probability would exceed the first. A similar principle might be applied to a report such as the present case. What is the probability that Penrose actually believes this fantasy? And what is the probability that the report about Penrose believing it is inaccurate? Assessing probabilities no doubt is difficult, but I know where my bet lies!

                      Best regards,

                      Donald W. Zimmerman
                      Vancouver, BC, Canada
                      mailto:dwzimm%40telus.net
                      http://www3.telus.net/public/a7a828



                       
                      --
                      Regards,
                      Mark Hubey
                       
                      "Learning to think in mathematical terms is an essential part of becoming a liberally educated person. "
                      -- Kenyon College Math Department Web Page
                       
                       




                      --
                      Regards,
                      Mark Hubey

                      "Learning to think in mathematical terms is an essential part of becoming a liberally educated person. "
                      -- Kenyon College Math Department Web Page 


                    • Anna
                      Even black holes are unable to destroy all information. And each of us can be considered information. But what exactly survives? Perhaps an abstract. Which is
                      Message 10 of 18 , Nov 4, 2012
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Even black holes are unable to destroy all information.  And each of us can be considered information. 
                        But what exactly survives? Perhaps an abstract. Which is ...?
                        Anna
                         
                        Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2012 7:36 AM
                        To: Evol
                        Subject: Re: [evol-psych] Re: Life after death: Dr Stuart Hameroff

                        Well, it kind of opposes Szilard who said something like "You cannot get anything for nothing, not even an observation" to restate the SEcond Law of Thermodynamics. It looks like knowledge/information is free but losing it costs. 

                        <snip>
                      • Wade
                        Yes Penrose does have some flaky views on a variety of subjects but I think it s a massive distortion of his position to suggest he believes anything quite
                        Message 11 of 18 , Nov 4, 2012
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Yes Penrose does have some flaky views on a  variety of subjects but I think it's a massive  distortion of his position to suggest he believes anything quite this silly.

                          Don is quite right to reference Hume on this point. Hume's clarity of thought is quite breathtaking. For a lad of 16 to start a work, The Treatise that 10 years later had provided the foundation of modern thinking on so many areas of human understanding is truly astonishing.  One can clearly see the influence of Hume in the writings of some of the most clear and perceptive modern thinkers such as Dawkins and Dennett.

                          Wade

                          On 3 November 2012 23:40, Don Zimmerman <dwzimm@...> wrote:
                           

                          --- In evolutionary-psychology@yahoogroups.com, Wade <wmaillist@...> wrote:

                          > That intelligent men of the calibre of Penrose can believe such fantasy
                          > twaddle astounds me. That Nils laps it up comes as no surprise whatsoever
                          > sadly.

                          DWZ:
                          All reports of miraculous events can be subjected to a simple test suggested originally, I believe, by David Hume. You first assess the likelihood that the remarkabe event actually occurred, which usually would mean that basic laws of physics involving gravitation, momentum, etc., were violated. Next, you assess the likelihood that the event did not occur, that is, that the report was inaccurate or fraudulent, the reporter was self-serving, running a scam, insane, whatever.

                          Almost without exception the second probability would exceed the first. A similar principle might be applied to a report such as the present case. What is the probability that Penrose actually believes this fantasy? And what is the probability that the report about Penrose believing it is inaccurate? Assessing probabilities no doubt is difficult, but I know where my bet lies!

                          Best regards,

                          Donald W. Zimmerman
                          Vancouver, BC, Canada
                          dwzimm@...
                          http://www3.telus.net/public/a7a828


                        • hibbsa
                          When eminent scientists reach a certain age and stage, they do us all a favour by offering speculations on those matters that - rationally or not - go to the
                          Message 12 of 18 , Nov 4, 2012
                          • 0 Attachment
                            When eminent scientists reach a certain age and stage, they do us all a
                            favour by offering speculations on those matters that - rationally or
                            not - go to the heart of what most humans now and who have ever lived,
                            look at the sky and wonder about.


                            --- In evolutionary-psychology@yahoogroups.com, Wade <wmaillist@...>
                            wrote:
                            >
                            > Yes Penrose does have some flaky views on a variety of subjects but I
                            > think it's a massive distortion of his position to suggest he believes
                            > anything quite this silly.
                            >
                            > Don is quite right to reference Hume on this point. Hume's clarity of
                            > thought is quite breathtaking. For a lad of 16 to start a work, The
                            > Treatise that 10 years later had provided the foundation of modern
                            thinking
                            > on so many areas of human understanding is truly astonishing. One can
                            > clearly see the influence of Hume in the writings of some of the most
                            clear
                            > and perceptive modern thinkers such as Dawkins and Dennett.
                            >
                            > Wade
                            >
                            > On 3 November 2012 23:40, Don Zimmerman dwzimm@... wrote:
                            >
                            <snip>
                          • mark hubey
                            Hume got something half-right by trying to do the wrong thing, more or less. Nothing else is remembered by anyone else. And he s only remembered because
                            Message 13 of 18 , Nov 4, 2012
                            • 0 Attachment

                              Hume got something half-right by trying to do the wrong thing, more or less. Nothing else
                              is remembered by anyone else. And he's only remembered because philosophers still
                              hate scientists, and the fiction-readers more so.



                              On Sun, Nov 4, 2012 at 5:07 PM, Wade <wmaillist@...> wrote:
                               

                              Yes Penrose does have some flaky views on a  variety of subjects but I think it's a massive  distortion of his position to suggest he believes anything quite this silly.


                              Don is quite right to reference Hume on this point. Hume's clarity of thought is quite breathtaking. For a lad of 16 to start a work, The Treatise that 10 years later had provided the foundation of modern thinking on so many areas of human understanding is truly astonishing.  One can clearly see the influence of Hume in the writings of some of the most clear and perceptive modern thinkers such as Dawkins and Dennett.

                              Wade

                              On 3 November 2012 23:40, Don Zimmerman <dwzimm@...> wrote:
                               

                              --- In evolutionary-psychology@yahoogroups.com, Wade <wmaillist@...> wrote:

                              > That intelligent men of the calibre of Penrose can believe such fantasy
                              > twaddle astounds me. That Nils laps it up comes as no surprise whatsoever
                              > sadly.

                              DWZ:
                              All reports of miraculous events can be subjected to a simple test suggested originally, I believe, by David Hume. You first assess the likelihood that the remarkabe event actually occurred, which usually would mean that basic laws of physics involving gravitation, momentum, etc., were violated. Next, you assess the likelihood that the event did not occur, that is, that the report was inaccurate or fraudulent, the reporter was self-serving, running a scam, insane, whatever.

                              Almost without exception the second probability would exceed the first. A similar principle might be applied to a report such as the present case. What is the probability that Penrose actually believes this fantasy? And what is the probability that the report about Penrose believing it is inaccurate? Assessing probabilities no doubt is difficult, but I know where my bet lies!

                              Best regards,

                              Donald W. Zimmerman
                              Vancouver, BC, Canada
                              dwzimm@...
                              http://www3.telus.net/public/a7a828





                              --
                              Regards,
                              Mark Hubey

                              "Learning to think in mathematical terms is an essential part of becoming a liberally educated person. "
                              -- Kenyon College Math Department Web Page 


                            • Julienne
                              ... What if we lived centuries ago, and talked about stones falling from the sky? Or flying? Or computers? What if we just don t know yet what the laws
                              Message 14 of 18 , Nov 5, 2012
                              • 0 Attachment
                                At 11:40 AM 11/3/2012, Don Zimmerman wrote:
                                >--- In evolutionary-psychology@yahoogroups.com, Wade <wmaillist@...> wrote:
                                >
                                > > That intelligent men of the calibre of Penrose can believe such fantasy
                                > > twaddle astounds me. That Nils laps it up comes as no surprise whatsoever
                                > > sadly.
                                >
                                >
                                >DWZ:
                                >All reports of miraculous events can be subjected to a simple test
                                >suggested originally, I believe, by David Hume. You first assess the
                                >likelihood that the remarkabe event actually occurred, which usually
                                >would mean that basic laws of physics involving gravitation,
                                >momentum, etc., were violated. Next, you assess the likelihood that
                                >the event did not occur, that is, that the report was inaccurate or
                                >fraudulent, the reporter was self-serving, running a scam, insane, whatever.
                                >
                                >Almost without exception the second probability would exceed the
                                >first. A similar principle might be applied to a report such as the
                                >present case. What is the probability that Penrose actually believes
                                >this fantasy? And what is the probability that the report about
                                >Penrose believing it is inaccurate? Assessing probabilities no doubt
                                >is difficult, but I know where my bet lies!

                                What if we lived centuries ago, and talked about stones falling from
                                the sky? Or flying? Or computers?

                                What if we just don't know yet what the laws involved are?


                                Julienne



                                The selection of a Republican candidate for the presidency of this
                                globalized and expansive empire is - and I say this seriously - the
                                greatest competition of idiocy and ignorance that has ever been.
                                Fidel Castro. January 2012
                              • charles beck
                                Hi Wade As a person with a background and career in financial matters What do you think of Richard Wolff s views on the reasons for the 2008 debacle and his
                                Message 15 of 18 , Nov 5, 2012
                                • 0 Attachment

                                  Hi Wade

                                  As a person with a background and career in financial matters

                                  What do you think of Richard Wolff’s views on the reasons for the 2008 debacle and his recipe for dealing with it?

                                  I have been trying to find his published papers on the topic and have had no luck.

                                  What is his reputation academically?

                                   

                                  Charles Beck

                                  Prof Emer

                                  Psychology / Neuroscience

                                  University of Alberta

                                  Capitalism Hits the Fan and Q&A with Professor Richard Wolff

                                  Capitalism Hits the Fan and Q&A with Professor Richard Wolff

                                  With breathtaking clarity, renowned University of Massachusetts Economics Professor Richard Wolff breaks down the root causes of today's economic crisis, showing how it was decades in the making and in fact reflects seismic failures within the structures of American-style capitalism itself. Wolff traces the source of the economic crisis to the 1970s, when wages began to stagnate and American workers were forced into a dysfunctional spiral of borrowing and debt that ultimately exploded in the mortgage meltdown. By placing the crisis within this larger historical and systemic frame, Wolff argues convincingly that the proposed government “bailouts,” stimulus packages, and calls for increased market regulation will not be enough to address the real causes of the crisis - in the end suggesting that far more fundamental change will be necessary to avoid future catastrophes. Richly illustrated with motion graphics and charts, this is a superb introduction designed to help ordinary citizens understand, and react to, the unraveling economic crisis. Excerpt from capitalismhitsthefan.com (Click here to buy the DVD) Full Documentary 1 hour, 44 minutes.

                                  Source:Free Full Documentaries [1hr 44m]
                                  http://www.fulldocumentary.net/economics/default.asp?action=listing&id=1658

                                   

                                  ,_._,___

                                • Don Zimmerman
                                  ... DWZ: Indeed the future has always brought new scientific developments that nobody expected or predicted. People are inclined to imagine the future by
                                  Message 16 of 18 , Nov 5, 2012
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    --- In evolutionary-psychology@yahoogroups.com, Julienne <julienne@...> wrote:

                                    > What if we lived centuries ago, and talked about stones falling from
                                    > the sky? Or flying? Or computers?
                                    >
                                    > What if we just don't know yet what the laws involved are?


                                    DWZ:
                                    Indeed the future has always brought new scientific developments that nobody expected or predicted. People are inclined to imagine the future by extrapolating in a straightforward way from current knowledge and technology that is alreadty in place, but cannot foresee coming breakthroughs and radical advances. Forecasts are made by extrapolating from what Kuhn called "normal science" without allowing for "revolutionary science."

                                    So Leonardo da Vinci may have imagined tanks and flying machines, and all kinds of future inventions that actually came about, and Jules Verne may have thought about submarines, but neither of them could possibly have foreseen atomic weapons, lasers, electronic digital computers, or the mysteries of quantum entanglement, not even if their fabulous brains had functioned at full speed ahead 24 hours a day.

                                    Best regards,

                                    Donald W. Zimmerman
                                    Vancouver, BC, Canada
                                    dwzimm@...
                                    http://www3.telus.net/public/a7a82899
                                  • Nils K.
                                    Dear Wade, dear All! Comments to your claims copied below: Penrose has no flaky view on any subject, Wade. On the contrary he is at the cutting edge when it
                                    Message 17 of 18 , Nov 5, 2012
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      Dear Wade, dear All!

                                      Comments to your claims copied below:

                                      Penrose has no flaky view on any subject, Wade. On the contrary he
                                      is at the cutting edge when it comes to the philosophy and physics
                                      of the mind. But, not you, Wade, and not many others, can follow
                                      his thinking. We are simply playing several divisions below Roger
                                      Penrose, both when it comes to knowledge, talent, and intelligence.

                                      And apropos Hume, if I remember correctly, he was a blank slater,
                                      and so was a totally worthless and untalented philosopher in these
                                      fields.

                                      Wade, you do also mention Dawkins. He is also surprisingly
                                      untalented when it comes to human behvior. He does not even
                                      understand that we humans do have the extremely powerful religion
                                      instinct. Dawkins is also incapable of thinking and writing
                                      correctly when it comes to logic. He is becoming more and more of a
                                      joke and scandal "philosopher" and activist. He cannot even use
                                      statistics properly, turning much of his use of statistics into
                                      pure bluff.

                                      Like Hume, Dawkins is also a worthless philosopher in the fields
                                      we are discussing here and now.

                                      [COPY:]

                                      Wade:

                                      Yes Penrose does have some flaky views on a variety of subjects but I
                                      think it's a massive distortion of his position to suggest he believes
                                      anything quite this silly.
                                      Don is quite right to reference Hume on this point. Hume's
                                      clarity of thought is quite breathtaking. For a lad of 16 to start
                                      a work, The Treatise that 10 years later had provided the foundation
                                      of modern thinking on so many areas of human understanding is
                                      truly astonishing. One can clearly see the influence of Hume in
                                      the writings of some of the most clear and perceptive modern
                                      thinkers such as Dawkins and Dennett.

                                      *************

                                      Best,
                                      NKO
                                    • Anna
                                      This is not about new laws. This is about Hameroff’s claim that consciousness is not produced by brain, but brain is a mere outlet for it. If this is
                                      Message 18 of 18 , Nov 5, 2012
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        This is not about new laws.  This is about Hameroff’s  claim that consciousness is not produced by  brain, but  brain is  a mere outlet for it. If this is true, then consciousness  is  an operator who is also an operation.  Thus consciousness would be  God.
                                        God who makes distinction ( such as you or me or a stone or a table) and at the same time becomes the distinction he makes.
                                         
                                        Anna
                                         
                                        Sent: Monday, November 05, 2012 1:21 PM
                                        Subject: [evol-psych] Re: Life after death: Dr Stuart Hameroff
                                         
                                         

                                        --- In mailto:evolutionary-psychology%40yahoogroups.com, Julienne <julienne@...> wrote:

                                        > What if we lived centuries ago,
                                        and talked about stones falling from
                                        > the sky? Or flying? Or
                                        computers?
                                        >
                                        > What if we just don't know yet what the laws
                                        involved are?

                                        DWZ:
                                        Indeed the future has always brought new scientific developments that nobody expected or predicted. People are inclined to imagine the future by extrapolating in a straightforward way from current knowledge and technology that is alreadty in place, but cannot foresee coming breakthroughs and radical advances. Forecasts are made by extrapolating from what Kuhn called "normal science" without allowing for "revolutionary science."

                                        So Leonardo da Vinci may have imagined tanks and flying machines, and all kinds of future inventions that actually came about, and Jules Verne may have thought about submarines, but neither of them could possibly have foreseen atomic weapons, lasers, electronic digital computers, or the mysteries of quantum entanglement, not even if their fabulous brains had functioned at full speed ahead 24 hours a day.

                                        Best regards,

                                        Donald W. Zimmerman
                                        Vancouver, BC, Canada
                                        mailto:dwzimm%40telus.net
                                        http://www3.telus.net/public/a7a82899

                                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.