Consider the implications of the quantum observer effect, how the observation of a wave potential of a particle gets condensed to the actual particle when it is observed. Expand that to the universal level, and without an observer the universe COULD NOT exist except as a waveform potential of a universe. (I know I know, many science types do NOT like that interpretation, especially when they do not want to introduce 'god' into the equation of observers).
So, without speaking for the one you asked, I believe it the opposite, the temporal universe is caused by the spirit.
The what counts as "observers" I do find as a worthwhile question; is a sensor acting as an observer, or is it holding some quantum state potentials until an observer comes in to collapse the wave. How about the single celled organisms? They must be observing their own environment, even without the eyes to see.
The cocreation you mention, I like that word, the concept would help explain why the objects in the physical world don't collapse into new positions. If we are talking about a cocreative agreement (way below consciousness).
I've absorbed alot of the woo woo stuff too (what the bleep do we know), but the one that really hit was one called "my big TOE" (theory of everything), which was written by a physicist who had an OBE and then began studying the non-physical that he could no longer deny because of experience.
The idea I got from several directions is that everything is consciousness.
Reading on evolution, as, for instance, Richard Dawkins nicely describes it: a photosensitive spot might increase the chances of noticing a predator (shadow? difference between light and dark) and therefor increase the chances of reproduction, leaving that particular feat to descendants.
So, indeed, what is observing exactly? When we, as sentient beings, observe an event unfolding without judgement, and thus without intent, does that change the outcome of the event? It seems to be the case that observing that way, without judgement, leaves the event intact.
Anecdote:
When my daughter was very young, her mother brought her down the stairs one morning, and said: Let's open the curtains together. And when they were done my daughter looked outside. The world had changed. Our garden was totally covered with white stuff.
While I watched that scene, without any judgement, neutral, without words. I heard her mother say: look snow!
At that point I could not suppress a: Damn you ruined it!
Later on I asked her, how it went. So, she told me, they had played in the snow, giggling, wonderful. Then I asked: what would have happened if you had not said anything? IF you had not named it? If you had not framed it in frequency and vibration?
She looked totally shocked and could not follow. You, I said, could have listened and watched what our daughter really had done. You would have seen, she did not need a name to enjoy the moment! By naming it, you tried to program her into our system, whereas she is young enough to live without. As long as either of us, and preferably we both hang around.
When you have 6 billion people living in fear based on programming and judements... is that a self-fulfilling prophecy?
It seems, from several double slit experiments, the intent of an observer (the state of the observer) changes the outcome.
The experiments (I mentioned elsewhere here) was the ones where they were trying to see if people's intention could have an impact on random number generators. The results have consistently shown that this does in fact influence the RNG to produce more 0's or 1's than random variation and in the anticipated direction.
This even happened where they ran the RNG and printed the result in a room where nobody saw it, THEN performed a repeat of the experiment and it had the same levels of influence.
The term used is "small, but statistically significant effect", I believe there have been similar results with experiments concerning prayer, I don't remember if that was actual studies though.
The universe exists whether we are here to observe it or not. And I do agree that the spirit causes the temporal universe, the other user account can’t give a straight answer on it.
I don't buy into that classical interpretation of quantum physics that tries to explain away those quantum effects as the same as the observer effect (where measuring something has an impact on the something, ie, to get the pressure in a tire needs to release a bit of air to get the measurement meaning the actual pressure is different from what was measured because of releasing some pressure to get the reading).
So, IMO, without observers the universe would exist like Schrodinger's cat, both in a state of existing and not existing simultaneously, or a 'waveform potential' representing every potential configuration of the universe.
Well, it does make good fiction because they extrapolate these things in extreme, fictional ways.
Why? Because it helps push the secularity of the scientific realm, and if you're not already aware the premise of modern science was an antagonism to be able to explain all without appeal to the spiritual.
At a certain point the argument of a "quantum AND macro world" that are distinct and separate fails because the macro world is literally built up by the quantum.
This is why the large scale experiments with random number generators being influenced by intent have consistently and repeatedly shown a "weak, but statistically significant effect" (EVEN in the one where they printed the result without observer BEFORE the experiment, in attempt to merge in the Schrodinger's cat factor into the experiment)
Consider the implications of the quantum observer effect, how the observation of a wave potential of a particle gets condensed to the actual particle when it is observed. Expand that to the universal level, and without an observer the universe COULD NOT exist except as a waveform potential of a universe. (I know I know, many science types do NOT like that interpretation, especially when they do not want to introduce 'god' into the equation of observers).
So, without speaking for the one you asked, I believe it the opposite, the temporal universe is caused by the spirit.
Interesting thought!
That brings the question to the one or ones doing the observing and the power levels of observing.
But also the manifesting power through frequency and vibration.
And lastly, perhaps the interaction between the two andere the several participants in the events ( co-creation)
The what counts as "observers" I do find as a worthwhile question; is a sensor acting as an observer, or is it holding some quantum state potentials until an observer comes in to collapse the wave. How about the single celled organisms? They must be observing their own environment, even without the eyes to see.
The cocreation you mention, I like that word, the concept would help explain why the objects in the physical world don't collapse into new positions. If we are talking about a cocreative agreement (way below consciousness).
I've absorbed alot of the woo woo stuff too (what the bleep do we know), but the one that really hit was one called "my big TOE" (theory of everything), which was written by a physicist who had an OBE and then began studying the non-physical that he could no longer deny because of experience.
The idea I got from several directions is that everything is consciousness.
Reading on evolution, as, for instance, Richard Dawkins nicely describes it: a photosensitive spot might increase the chances of noticing a predator (shadow? difference between light and dark) and therefor increase the chances of reproduction, leaving that particular feat to descendants.
So, indeed, what is observing exactly? When we, as sentient beings, observe an event unfolding without judgement, and thus without intent, does that change the outcome of the event? It seems to be the case that observing that way, without judgement, leaves the event intact.
Anecdote:
When my daughter was very young, her mother brought her down the stairs one morning, and said: Let's open the curtains together. And when they were done my daughter looked outside. The world had changed. Our garden was totally covered with white stuff.
While I watched that scene, without any judgement, neutral, without words. I heard her mother say: look snow!
At that point I could not suppress a: Damn you ruined it!
Later on I asked her, how it went. So, she told me, they had played in the snow, giggling, wonderful. Then I asked: what would have happened if you had not said anything? IF you had not named it? If you had not framed it in frequency and vibration?
She looked totally shocked and could not follow. You, I said, could have listened and watched what our daughter really had done. You would have seen, she did not need a name to enjoy the moment! By naming it, you tried to program her into our system, whereas she is young enough to live without. As long as either of us, and preferably we both hang around.
When you have 6 billion people living in fear based on programming and judements... is that a self-fulfilling prophecy?
It seems, from several double slit experiments, the intent of an observer (the state of the observer) changes the outcome.
The experiments (I mentioned elsewhere here) was the ones where they were trying to see if people's intention could have an impact on random number generators. The results have consistently shown that this does in fact influence the RNG to produce more 0's or 1's than random variation and in the anticipated direction.
This even happened where they ran the RNG and printed the result in a room where nobody saw it, THEN performed a repeat of the experiment and it had the same levels of influence.
The term used is "small, but statistically significant effect", I believe there have been similar results with experiments concerning prayer, I don't remember if that was actual studies though.
The universe exists whether we are here to observe it or not. And I do agree that the spirit causes the temporal universe, the other user account can’t give a straight answer on it.
A waveform potential OF a temporal universe.
I don't buy into that classical interpretation of quantum physics that tries to explain away those quantum effects as the same as the observer effect (where measuring something has an impact on the something, ie, to get the pressure in a tire needs to release a bit of air to get the measurement meaning the actual pressure is different from what was measured because of releasing some pressure to get the reading).
So, IMO, without observers the universe would exist like Schrodinger's cat, both in a state of existing and not existing simultaneously, or a 'waveform potential' representing every potential configuration of the universe.
Yeah, I don’t buy into the whole “if there’s no observers, there’s a Schrödinger’s cat situation”.
It’s a mistaken application of Quantum-world effects on the macro-world. It makes for some cool sci-fi though.
Well, it does make good fiction because they extrapolate these things in extreme, fictional ways.
Why? Because it helps push the secularity of the scientific realm, and if you're not already aware the premise of modern science was an antagonism to be able to explain all without appeal to the spiritual.
At a certain point the argument of a "quantum AND macro world" that are distinct and separate fails because the macro world is literally built up by the quantum.
This is why the large scale experiments with random number generators being influenced by intent have consistently and repeatedly shown a "weak, but statistically significant effect" (EVEN in the one where they printed the result without observer BEFORE the experiment, in attempt to merge in the Schrodinger's cat factor into the experiment)