₦airaland Forum

plaetton:
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8907974/#:~:text=Neuroscience%20has%20furnished%20evidence%20that,the%20features%20of%20our%20experience.

Here is an excerpt from the long article.

Neuroscience research, led by the funding that supports it, is dominated by research into disorders of the nervous system. The pursuit of treatments and cures (and the research efforts into understanding the normal function of the brain) builds on decades of discovery into all levels of neural organization – seemingly none of it reliant on knowing very much at all about consciousness. Studies of how consciousness is generated, and why it has the characteristics it does, is nevertheless a focus of considerable interest and effort. There is no consensus about how it is generated, or how best to approach the question, but all investigations start with the incontrovertible premise that consciousness comes about from the action of the brain.

The approach the majority of neuroscientists take to the question of how consciousness is generated, it is probably fair to say, is to ignore it. Although there are active research programs looking at correlates of consciousness, and explorations of informational properties of what might be relevant neural ensembles, the tacitly implied mechanism of consciousness in these approaches is that it somehow just happens. This reliance on a “magical emergence” of consciousness does not address the “objectively unreasonable” proposition that elements that have no attributes or properties that can be said to relate to consciousness somehow aggregate to produce it. Neuroscience has furnished evidence that neurons are fundamental to consciousness; at the fine and gross scale, aspects of our conscious experience depend on specific patterns of neural activity – in some way, the connectivity of neurons computes the features of our experience. So how do we get from knowing that some specific configurations of cells produce consciousness to understanding why this would be the case? Behind the voltages and currents electrophysiologists measure is a staggeringly complex system of electromagnetic fields – these are the fundamental physics of neurons and glia in the brain. The brain is entirely made of electromagnetism (EM) phenomena from the level of the atoms up. The EM field literally manifests the computations, or signaling, or information processing/activities performed by connected cellular ensembles that generate a 1st-person perspective. An investigation into the EM field at the cellular scale provides the possibility of identifying the outward signs of a mechanism in fundamental terms (physics), as opposed to merely describing the correlates of our mental abstractions of it.

DeepSight:
Summarize your point in one sentence please.

DeepSight:
You may be the one overthinking things. If you missed it, the point is that a song, just like a thought, is immaterial and conceived in the mind. It is only expressed physically and heard physically by physical tools such as musical instruments and the ear.

If I recall correctly, on that thread you said that a thought can be seen on a computer screen. You really need to rethink that. A thought is invisible. What you see when something is written down are mere symbols of expression.

VR resonates with me as I believe thats what this world is. A simulation. A shadow or reflection of reality.

LordReed:
Same difference. The CPU that is processing is creating an immaterial image that is conveyed to you by physical means of a screen and your eyes. It's very simple if you accept that a song is immaterial then it's no great leap to see that the CPUs output is also immaterial.

By Andromeda! Did you go to sharpen your strawman making skills?! I never said anywhere that a thought can be seen on a computer screen. Maybe you should go over the thread and don't make unfounded assumptions. And hopefully this isn't going to be a pattern you continue with, attributing to me things I never said or even implied.

Do you think the computer constructs we call virtual reality are material or immaterial?

plaetton:
Neurons and their activities produce consciousness.
The mind is a derivative of neural activities, not the other way round.

DeepSight:
We have been over and over this, I cant start again so we have to leave it.



Unless I am terribly mistaken by virtue of old age and the fog of Nigerian life, I am quite certain you said so, or something very close to that. Its quite a bother to flick through 39 pages though, but I will try during the week.

Its material. It consists of physical light which is made of photons.

LordReed:
And when you don't find it you had better apologize and quit attributing your baseless assumptions to me.

LoLz! Then the song is material, it's made up of sound waves! Your ill logic will be your own trap. Bwahahahahaha!

DeepSight:
You know I will - I have honour like that. But remember I also said "or something close to that."

But you said it, and I will find it.



No, one can sing a song in one's head without any sound waves.

LordReed:
Just as one can have images in one's head without a screen or light.

plaetton:
The debate here is that every Nigerian believes in God. Every God believer believes that God is the architect of their fortunes, personal and collective. Every God believing Nigerian prays multiples times a day from childhood to old age.
Churches and Mosques pray multiple times each day and night. Offerings, vigils, tithes, seed sowing, evangelism are all done to beseech and placate a God that is expected to acknowledge, bless and protect the faithful.
Faith, worship, offerings , prayers, etc, are deemed spiritual investments from which celestial dividends are expected, and much much needed in this darkest hour of Nigeria's checkered existence.

If faith and worship are spiritual investments, at what point in our personal and national life do we put a stop loss , cut our losses, and perhaps begin to consider other investment options?

For goodness sake, Nigeria's investment in the God stock has plummeted in value over the past 200yrs (?) to zero.

What gives ?

DeepSight:
Yes, but there is a distinction. You said Virtual Reality. VR must been seen by an experiencer - not imagined only.
Images in one's head are not VR. They are thoughts - invisible and immaterial - just like a song in one's head.

Remember I have said from the beginning thoughts are immaterial and invisible. So is a song.

LordReed:
Dude VR is not made of material hence the name VIRTUAL. It's an illusion!

Please don't go around telling people VR is material, it might make them think of committing you.

plaetton:
You know that's just an educated guess, at best.

If scientific investigation, the foundation of everything we currently know about the universe, cannot explain spirit or God, then what are basis for a belief not grounded in the immutable laws of math and physics?
If we don't have foundational basis (science) with which to understand reality, then it all comes down to " just believe me bro" .

DeepSight:
Dont be silly, when you wear a VR Visor, and see images, what do they consist of? Is light not projected to your eyes to form those images and does light not consist of photons and are photons not physical and are physical things not of matter?

Please.

Its pretty much like saying a hologram is not physical. A hologram is physical because it consists of physical light as well.
Maybe you dont understand that there are physical things which are so light (as opposed to heavy) that one can walk through them as though they were not there.

LordReed:
You are the one being silly. The VR images are NOT made of light. The tech in a VR is similar to your monitor or phone screen, just that the googles are presenting 2 images, 1 to each eye to make it seem like 3D.

I didn't mention hologram. VR is not hologram. Computer Monitor or phone screen is not hologram. So what is the point of mentioning hologram?

For someone who cannot grasp that a shadow is not material, you are not in a position to lecture me about light and its properties.

DeepSight:
I cant help you. You are pretty much saying that light (and the photons it consists of) is not physical - and this is pure nonsense. Think what you like - but if they put us before a panel of scientists on this matter, you will be the one institutionalized - and rapidly so.

Just look at the bold and see how daft it is. So according to you light does not emanate from or through/ or bounce off your monitor or phone to render anything therein visible?

Sweet Jesus.

The only way your physical eye can ee anything - including VR - is by the transmission of light to it. Elementary.

If you cant understand this simple analogy you cant be helped. What is a hologram if not a projection of light? What is VR if not a projection of light? What are the images on your monitor and phone if not projections of light?

LordReed, I have always held you in high esteem, what's all this today? Has someone who cant grasp the most elementary precepts hacked your moniker?

Talk about strawmanning. What I actually said is that a shadow is not a thing - in that it doesnt even exist. I dis not call it material. I said its not even a thing and that caused us to debate at length the meaning of the word "thing."

plaetton:
You know that's just an educated guess, at best.

If scientific investigation, the foundation of everything we currently know about the universe, cannot explain spirit or God, then what are basis for a belief not grounded in the immutable laws of math and physics?
If we don't have foundational basis (science) with which to understand reality, then it all comes down to " just believe me bro" .

LordReed:
You are the one who needs help. Can you quote anywhere I said light is not physical? How can you read anything I wrote and come to the conclusion that I implied it in any way? I repeatedly stressed that the IMAGE is not material and that is because it is an ILLUSION. It is similar to the effect light has on reflective surfaces eg a mirror and the way shadows are produced. The IMAGE you are seeing is not made of substance. Contrast that with a painting or a sculpture where the image is a physical substance.

Simple way to grasp this. If you destroy the monitor, you will not be destroying the image because as long as the signal producing the image persists it will be displayed again with a new monitor. This will not happen if you destroy a painting or a sculpture.



By Andromeda's light, who contested this?





The way a hologram works is very different from the way an LCD screen works so NO it is not an analogy for this AT ALL.



You the one who needs to be asked this question if you think a hologram is similar to an LCD screen.





Oh right, my bad. Shadows doesn't exist, but I can see them. What marvelous magic. LMAO!

DeepSight:
[/b]

Off to the office, might respond later, but in brief -

Look here -

https://www.seriousreaders.com/blog/how-does-light-in-a-virtual-reality-headset-work?srsltid=AfmBOoogs9MYpKPiuMxkDfhRnyh9EckYtGJh93aKJFhTz1Ew4hRNESh-

And here -

https://www.teamviewer.com/en/solutions/use-cases/virtual-reality-vr/?

2. VR is [b]not an illussion. An illusion is something that is not there at all. With VR you are seing a real projection - just not what it imitates. Same as a hologram. You are seeing a real projection - it is [b]not [/b]your imagination. It is just not what it imitates.

I didnt say images on a TV or monitor are the same as a hologram. But if you cant see the analogy in that they all are projections of light, thats on you, not me.

3. On shadows, we debated extensively. My position is that you only see the surface already there in lesser light. I stand by it.



Later.

LordReed:
You are the one who needs help. Can you quote anywhere I said light is not physical?

LordReed:
Kindly quote in either of the 2 links where they say VR is light.

DeepSight:
Here. We can solve this simply by going back to what the argument was:

You argued that immaterial things could be produced by material things. I argued that they could not.
In support of your argument, you brought up various things. You have now brought up VR in the same regard.

I am saying that VR Visors do not produce immaterial things because the light you see is material.

Since you agree that light is physical, then you have ceded the debate - and your point is lost - because VR is not an example of physical things producing non physical things.

This is the context of the discussion I am working with. If you are working with a different context, let me know so we can align and stop confusing one another.

DeepSight:
Also -

The VR headset is one of the most important wearables for users who want to immerse themselves in digital worlds. It replaces the natural field of view with a computer-generated field of view. To make that happen, the wearable integrates infrared LEDs, motion sensors, cameras and screens. They all enable the VR headset to gather relevant information and provide it for the human eye

https://www.teamviewer.com/en/solutions/use-cases/virtual-reality-vr/

DeepSight:
Here you go -

Bending light inside VR headsets

Virtual reality headsets shape a virtual world around you by projecting two slightly different screens in front of you, which you can see through two lenses. The different angles between the two lenses allow you to see a 3D environment using only a flat 2D screen. These screens are similar to other LCD screens you see all over the place, such as on televisions or smartphones, and they are lit by a light source behind the screen.

This means that your eyes are very close to the screen, and the lenses bend the light emitted, making it look as though the world around you is further away than it is. This gives the level of depth required for your mind to believe you really are inside a virtual environment.

https://www.seriousreaders.com/blog/how-does-light-in-a-virtual-reality-headset-work?srsltid=AfmBOoogs9MYpKPiuMxkDfhRnyh9EckYtGJh93aKJFhTz1Ew4hRNESh-

Please dont tell me you fail to grasp this.
Will respond to the rest when in teh office and less busy there.

Versitee:
You assume wrong

Many believers in God are not investing in God to make the country better.

A lot of them invest their time in prayer to give them the strength to navigate through the troubling times.

Because they know that the world will never get better.

At least not until the resurrection.

The whole world lieth in the power of the wicked one.

So people who are investing in God for a better society ought to investigate their stands.

A better society is only possible by govt policies and governance. Not God

A better society is only possible by govt policies and governance. Not God

LordReed:
Dude it doesn't say VR IS LIGHT.

plaetton:
Since the dawn of human history, Religious people have advanced all sorts of arguments to support the existence of whatever God or diety that they believe in.
In the the prescience era, their arguments carried a lot weight, mostly because proof or evidence was not a requirement.
In the modern scientific era however, goddists have struggled to explain the existence of their particular God in the face of numerous advances in knowledge about the universe, our Earth and biological life.

So these days, the Religious folks have to do quiet a lot of logical acrobatics, mostly absurd fallacies, to justify their faith.

On this particular forum, non believers have been asked several times to prove that God does not exist.

Well, even though it is the responsibility of the believers to show proof of the existence of God, the nation of Nigeria does make a compelling case ,in fact, absolute proof, that God does not exist.

This is a nation of 200m+ people who expend the most time and energy to worship and pray to God.

In my 50+ years of life, no single prayer has been answered in Nigeria and for Nigeria.

Despite our absurd fixation with religion and our religiosity, Nigeria can best be described as a God-forsaken nation.

When will it become conscious in our minds that whoever sold us this grand bogey, has left us holding the bag full of desert sand ?

How long shall we continue to carry this bag of desert sand ?

Cc: Deepsight

DeepSight:
It sufficiently does.
On the road. Will be back.

LordReed:
It doesn't, not as a statement or by implication. This what your 2nd link says is VR: Virtual reality (VR) is a technology that allows users to immerse themselves in an artificial, computer-generated environment and interact with it in real-time. There is no implication that light is the only component to it to any degree that you can now say VR is light.

LordReed:
The IMAGE is not made of substance it is the illusion of the selective blocking of light.

DeepSight:
It beats the imagination that the same person who can say this can be so worked up at my description of shadows.
What is a shadow, if not the bold?

DeepSight:
So how did you read this - (the bold)?

Bending light inside VR headsets

Virtual reality headsets shape a virtual world around you by projecting two slightly different screens in front of you, which you can see through two lenses. The different angles between the two lenses allow you to see a 3D environment using only a flat 2D screen. These screens are similar to other LCD screens you see all over the place, such as on televisions or smartphones, and they are lit by a light source behind the screen.

Pay special attention to the words I have underlined, and dwell carefully on them without being jumpy or defensive or rigid.

There are somethings it's not worth wasting one's energy on. People can see white and call it black and vice versa. It happens all the time. Wasting energy arguing this matter is not worth it from the above. It is not in doubt that the entire VR experience is created by a system which includes multiple factors but what you see is light. And the above discloses this.

Infact, we do not need the above to disclose it, because people only ever see light - VR or not. Even when you are looking at a table in front of you, what you are actually seeing is the light bouncing off it.

In the case of VR as disclosed, here, it is manipulated light you are seeing, bent light. That is what it says here and that is what it is.

If it were not light, you will not see anything.

And the fact that the VR Visor works with your physical eyes is enough to close this matter. Why is it placed over your physical eyes if not for them to absorb the light for transmission to your optic nerves. Thus what you are seeing is light and light is physical, and that closes this matter firmly.

You can dance around as much as you like but the summary is that what you see in a VR experience is light, and light is physical and thus it is not an example of a physical thing producing a non physical thing as you claimed.

I will not debate this point further - unless you are able to provide a very tangible angle - so far you havent.