"Hi Murilo :)
I think that understanding the most basic principle of life is the most important factor for a good life. That principle is change. We should all acknowledge that change is part of life, whether it is good change or bad change, and that…"
I Power
Scientific Research & Self-Development Activism
C=hf
A lot of you are asking about 'C=hf' and since it's easy to misinterpret because we tend to think about 'consciousness' in abstract terms as being our personality or our 'soul', I thought I'd explain the basic meaning of the formula.
The question Zamie asked in his video was: what is this 'C'? Is it some sort of magical 'quantum consciousness'? Is it human consciousness? What is implied by it?
But this is like asking "E=mc²? What does it mean by 'energy'? Kinetic energy of a dog taking a walk? Potential energy of fuel in a car?". Just as E=mc² and all other basic theoretic mathematical statements in science, C=hf refers to any possible minimum unit of spacetime that makes up your consciousness, just as E=mc² refers to any sort of unit of energy or mass. This just pertains to any quantized unit of spacetime, not to abstract concepts of what consciousness is on either neurological or spiritual levels. And the formula certainly doesn't imply that there is some magical quantized 'consciousness particle', it just creates an obvious starting point for a theory of everything: quantized particles behave in a certain way, the ones that make up our consciousness behave the same way, this has certain implications. That is all :).
(oh and to those asking where it is derived from: De Broglie's equations establish that all mass and energy equals 'hf', therefore, consciousness does too)
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by D to the A on -
OK two things:
1) What is the unit of measurement of C? E is measured in Joules, C is measured in...? Joules?
2) Chiren states that C is a constant (in the livestream he said so) he said something about it being the ration of...can't remember. It cannot be a constant though, as "h" is already a constant and "f" is a variable. It has to be a variable. Explain?
-
Permalink Reply by Reese Leysen on -
Questions! Awesome :D. (I love it when people ask questions rather than jumping to conclusions very quickly)
1) Sure, we're talking about the basic quantized building blocks so if you'd want to come up with experiments to study the behavior of them, then you could measure these units in, say Joules. C=hf is a very fundamental theoretical statement, in the same sense that you could talk about a bar of gold as "Bar of Gold = hf". What is the bar? Is it centimeters? Joules? Kilograms? Centimeters? It is of course all of those things depending on how you approach it.
This would seem like it would then say absolutely nothing new about the bar, and this is actually true because it's simply stating the obvious, right? However, it's an important starting point to state that this bar of gold is subject to the laws of physics, including relativity and, on an atomic level, quantum mechanics. So far, so obvious. So why is it important to put all those obvious things together? Because by doing that, we can easily point out one astonishing fact: the fundamental repercussions of relativity on the bar's 'existence'.
In quantum mechanics, we look at the 'weirdness' and accept that it has existential repercussions. Even if we might not fully grasp what they are, they are nevertheless a huge part of the debate about the quantum world, except for those who subscribe to the 'shut up and calculate' philosophy. With the theory of relativity, the philosophical repercussions have been overlooked much more.
Since space and time are the same fabric, you can look at our bar from both angles: it is both 10 light-seconds and ten seconds long. If the bar would suddenly pop into existence right now and it disappears again after 5 seconds, only the first 5 light-seconds of the bar will have existed from your frame of reference. The bar has effectively been cut in half, and the other half was unable to have any influence on your reality in any way. It did not interact with you through light, gravity or any type of observable way. The other half effectively did not exist.
We can apply this to molecules as well. Go below something like 200 attoseconds and you don't even have enough time for a simple H2 molecule to come into existence. From our frame of reference, or our 'consciousness', the pattern that makes up everything we experience is the result of such fundamental spacetime units, which are not only subject to the laws of relativity where space can not exist without time, but also to the laws of quantum mechanics. This is the core of C=hf and everything that is explained in Chapter 2, Part 3 are basic repercussions of it.
2) C is not a constant if you want to observe someone else's frame of reference (it helps a lot to replace 'consciousness' by 'frame of reference'). But since every single minimum unit of spacetime that makes up your consciousness is always the basic reference frame that, through interaction with other units (in an abstract arrow of time) you can observe reality with, for you, within your own frame of reference, C can only be a constant. This is can be pretty abstract and any sort of analogy would be flawed but let me try anyway: imagine a clock that is somehow self-aware, it is 'conscious' and let's say one minimum unit of consciousness for the clock is 0.2 seconds. As outsiders we could make all sorts of assumptions and intellectual constructs and say things like: "the clock is experiencing reality at a frequency of 0.2!". But if the clock wants to scientifically study its own reality, what is its frequency? It can not establish a certain number to that, it can only label other observed frequencies of other phenomena. The frequency of the clock's frame of reference is 1 for itself cause it can't really be anything else. But put two of these clocks together and increase the velocity of one and you might have some very interesting things happen to how one clock observes the frequency of the other.
Btw I'm just explaining it the best I can with my limited knowledge (compared to Chiren's). But shoot if you have more questions!
-
Permalink Reply by DAN on -
"Bar of Gold = hf". What is the bar? Is it centimeters? Joules? Kilograms? Centimeters? It is of course all of those things depending on how you approach it."
Shouldn't it be Joule, because that's what h*f is?
-
Permalink Reply by Reese Leysen on
-
You could say that it is indeed Joules. But just like anything that is Joules, it is not just 'Joules'. The bar of gold in the example can also be Joules. That doesn't make it into an abstract 'Joules entity' of course, it's a measurement. And that measurement, in certain experiments would then allow you to say more about its mass, its momentum and so forth.
-
Permalink Reply by DAN on
-
Sorry, I still don't get it.
h is expressed in Joules per Second - f is expressed in 1/s therefore C, Bar of Gold, Energy = J
Joules is defined as (kg*m²)/s²
makes sense for me
Than I looked deborglie up in wiki: if I now messure this on a specific objects, lets say a photon - due the frequency I can define it's energy (but not his mass).
can makes sense to me
BoG=hf expressend in centimeters ??
Don't get that
-
Permalink Reply by Jan on -
it's not a mathematical formula in the sense that you can calculate a specific amount of consciousness with a given frequency as far as i understood it only says that consciousness is made up by the frequency things experience other things.
of course that formula is misleading then.
-
Permalink Reply by DAN on
-
misleading... yea you could say that. I think it's a fail
If what you say it's true than there is a need to define "experience of things"
-
-
Permalink Reply by DAN on
-
only to complete the argumentation
E=mc²
m beeing kg and c beeing m/s
therefore energy beeing (kg*m²)/s² which would be joule...
makes sense to me
-
Permalink Reply by Jarod Phillip Benowitz on -
You guys honestly didn't read Roger Penrose, Stuart Hameroff, and P.A. Zizzi's work on Quantum Mechanics and Consciousness. You guys botched this one real good.
-
Permalink Reply by anonimouse on -
c could be measured in volts, pr miliampers, since our brain works on electricity
Forum
Discussion: The core of a good life
Started by Murilo Scatolin de Almeida in Introductions. Last reply by Noah Keaton 9 hours ago. 1 Reply 0 Likes
Hello me, it's me again
Started by Grimreaper86 in Introductions. Last reply by Noah Keaton 18 hours ago. 5 Replies 0 Likes
Condemning others to validate ourselves.
Started by Lore in I Power: Self-Development Activism. Last reply by Lore on Thursday. 12 Replies 0 Likes
Latest Activity
Murilo Scatolin de Almeida posted a discussionDiscussion: The core of a good life
Hello, my name is Murilo, I'm from Brazil and this will be my first Discussion Thread. The foccus on this thread will be discuss what YOU think its important to a good life.So.. I'm 19 years old, I was currently trying to find a profession that will…See More
Noah Keaton replied to Grimreaper86's discussion Hello me, it's me again"'Striving for the ideal'. I think that is what most of the people here on I Power want to do, but how are we going to do it?"
Lore replied to Grimreaper86's discussion Hello me, it's me again"Welcome man. Anarchy rules! I do think the point you bring up about the humanity we live with not being ideal for Anarchy is excellent. It is why, although quite hardened with my Anarchist views, it is more in the theoretical sense. I want to strive…"
Grimreaper86 replied to Grimreaper86's discussion Hello me, it's me again"Oh and anarchy imo has a bad stigma but doesn't necessarily imply a bad thing. It's an absence of laws and government, which I believe humanity is cable of living in such conditions in ideal circumstances, although the humanity we…"
Grimreaper86 replied to Grimreaper86's discussion Hello me, it's me again"I'm sure pure seeds can be found through the internet if no where else, while Monsanto is powerful they do not have control of all seeds, yet.....and honestly I wouldn't know what seeds are safe to buy, I'm working on learning more…"
Noah Keaton replied to Grimreaper86's discussion Hello me, it's me again"Welcome Grim :)
I'm fairly new myself, but haven't created an introduction of any sort. I mostly chat with the core members of I Power.
I say that I think similarly when it comes to the 'my environment is a blessing because I can…"
Grimreaper86 posted a discussionHello me, it's me again
Hello fellow posters,No matter where you go, there you are and so, here I am. Or am I?I don't suppose it really matters where we are because in all likelihood we're just mathematical algorithms in a simulated quantum universe and yet it doesn't feel…See More
Cole Riggall commented on Victor Morrow's video
What if we trusted you?: Jerry Michalski at TEDxCopenhagen 2012
"Amazing points this man has. For as long as I can remember, I've known the school system is broken and that there must be a better way. I'm so thankful for TED Talks and everything they expose people to, but I just hope things like this…"
© 2013 Created by Reese Leysen.
