LHC@home

I'm in the process of learning and understanding string theory along with studying your excellent entries. I do wonder one thing that I hope someone out there can help a simple mind out with. Everyones
cought up in the dimensions of particals. What about
the dimension of feeling? An example of what I'm trying to say is in a phrase I'm putting in my Music
CD "Riding the Graviton".

"Beyond the appearance of sight,sound,& feeling is
the extra dimension I experience when I'm jamming with a great band". I close my eyes, tilt my head back and hold an extended note. For about 3 seconds
I experience a void of thought. I'm no longer here on this planet. I've studyed Jorge and Carlos Santana
and I notice the same thing happens to them. The closest thing I can come to discribing this feeling is contemplative prayer. I wonder if the great minds of Ed Whitton, Lisa Randall, Leanard Susskind, or Michio Kaku can come up with a formula to discribe this void I go to. I ask because I've been there.

I'm always honored to ask the intelligent crunchers
of the world. I respect and enjoy everything I've read from all of you.
Thank you
God Bless you
Ernie Solis
Professional Guitar Player
P.S. "Its a stright line to Unification"

---

... Everyones
cought up in the dimensions of particals. What about
the dimension of feeling? ... I close my eyes, tilt my head back and hold an extended note. For about 3 seconds
I experience a void of thought. I'm no longer here on this planet.

The experience you mention is real enough, many people have had similar mystic experiences in religious settings, in musical settings, when viewing visual artworks, or in front of magnificent natural scenery.

However, I think we should be careful before calling this a "dimension" - certainly it is not one of the three well known dimensions which are all related to each other by certain mathematical principles. When physicists talk of time as a fourth dimension, they mean that in some respects it is related to the three well known dimensions in the same way as they relate to each other.

When string theorists add another 1, 2, or 400 dimensions, again they are adding mathematical structures that relate to the original three dimensions in a well defined mathematical way. In contrast, the experience I think you mean seems beyond the scope of all mathematics and logic.

Are we in touch with the infinite in such a mystic moment? In touch with God? Perhaps - I have had mystical insights in such times that have altered my attitude for the better, which perhaps does point to God. It certainly parallels other people's conversion experiences.

Is it an artifact of the human brain? If so, it is one that liberates a more postive mode of thinking than the usual one. In that sense it is fine to describe it as a new dimension of human experience.

But that is very different to the way a string theorist uses the term "dimension". In my opinion.

River~~

... Everyones
cought up in the dimensions of particals. What about
the dimension of feeling? ... I close my eyes, tilt my head back and hold an extended note. For about 3 seconds
I experience a void of thought. I'm no longer here on this planet.

The experience you mention is real enough, many people have had similar mystic experiences in religious settings, in musical settings, when viewing visual artworks, or in front of magnificent natural scenery.

However, I think we should be careful before calling this a "dimension" - certainly it is not one of the three well known dimensions which are all related to each other by certain mathematical principles. When physicists talk of time as a fourth dimension, they mean that in some respects it is related to the three well known dimensions in the same way as they relate to each other.

When string theorists add another 1, 2, or 400 dimensions, again they are adding mathematical structures that relate to the original three dimensions in a well defined mathematical way. In contrast, the experience I think you mean seems beyond the scope of all mathematics and logic.

Are we in touch with the infinite in such a mystic moment? In touch with God? Perhaps - I have had mystical insights in such times that have altered my attitude for the better, which perhaps does point to God. It certainly parallels other people's conversion experiences.

Is it an artifact of the human brain? If so, it is one that liberates a more postive mode of thinking than the usual one. In that sense it is fine to describe it as a new dimension of human experience.

But that is very different to the way a string theorist uses the term "dimension". In my opinion.

River~~

River, It is an honor to hear from you again sir........
Thank you so much for your insight, it is exactly what I was hoping for.
Ernie
Team Art Bell
God Bless You Sir

---

Hi River,
This question is for you sir. Its always an honor to ask a fellow cruncher
a question.

I keep hearing that everything in our excistance is math. Stephen Hawking
developed a structure of mathamatical Idea's for the excistance of ghost.
Can thier be a structure for feeling?

Simple minds want to know...

Thank you so much for your time sir.
I'm very honored...

Ernie
Professional guitarist
God Bless You

---

Stephen Hawking
developed a structure of mathamatical Idea's for the excistance of ghost.
Can thier be a structure for feeling?

Maybe, but if there is it will be one that is beyond human rational understanding.

The real maening of various limiting theorems (like Turing's, Church's, Godel's theorems) is that any algorithmic or logical or rational structure contains aspects that transcend that structure.

To take Turing's theorem: there is no guranteed method available to computer X that will tell if a given prgram for computer X will reach a conclusion. A more complex computer Y could tell if the program would complkete on computer X, but there will be other programs that computer Y will not be sure about.

Godel: any mathematical system contains true statemeant that cannot be proved within that system, even though they may be proved in a richer system that is set up to contain the original one. However the new system will itself have unprovable truths.

The more comlicated and complex a machine, or a mathematical system, gets the bigger and bigger the unprovable gaps get.

In the same way, there will be things the human brain can know that are beyond the human brain's wit to prove. This must be true even if our brains are totally deterministic - in which case the whole aesthetic, spiritual "dimension" of our existence is just how it feels to be a logical machine encountering an unprovable truth. Such feelings would be open to mathematical modelling by a more complex brain than ours, but would always remain beyond our own understanding.

In another way, those feelings would also be beyond the understanding of the super brain - by grasping the logical structure, the super brain would not experience our feelings the way we do, but differently. So they would have the structure but not the feeling.

River~~

---

Thank you LHC@home

God Bless You
Ernie

---

Stephen Hawking
developed a structure of mathamatical Idea's for the excistance of ghost.
Can thier be a structure for feeling?

Maybe, but if there is it will be one that is beyond human rational understanding.

The real maening of various limiting theorems (like Turing's, Church's, Godel's theorems) is that any algorithmic or logical or rational structure contains aspects that transcend that structure.

To take Turing's theorem: there is no guranteed method available to computer X that will tell if a given prgram for computer X will reach a conclusion. A more complex computer Y could tell if the program would complkete on computer X, but there will be other programs that computer Y will not be sure about.

Godel: any mathematical system contains true statemeant that cannot be proved within that system, even though they may be proved in a richer system that is set up to contain the original one. However the new system will itself have unprovable truths.

The more comlicated and complex a machine, or a mathematical system, gets the bigger and bigger the unprovable gaps get.

In the same way, there will be things the human brain can know that are beyond the human brain's wit to prove. This must be true even if our brains are totally deterministic - in which case the whole aesthetic, spiritual "dimension" of our existence is just how it feels to be a logical machine encountering an unprovable truth. Such feelings would be open to mathematical modelling by a more complex brain than ours, but would always remain beyond our own understanding.

In another way, those feelings would also be beyond the understanding of the super brain - by grasping the logical structure, the super brain would not experience our feelings the way we do, but differently. So they would have the structure but not the feeling.

River~~

River

Thank you for answering my question sir, your reply is truly inspiring.

God Bless You
Ernie
Team Art Bell

---

Stephen Hawking
developed a structure of mathamatical Idea's for the excistance of ghost.
Can thier be a structure for feeling?

Maybe, but if there is it will be one that is beyond human rational understanding.

The real maening of various limiting theorems (like Turing's, Church's, Godel's theorems) is that any algorithmic or logical or rational structure contains aspects that transcend that structure.

To take Turing's theorem: there is no guranteed method available to computer X that will tell if a given prgram for computer X will reach a conclusion. A more complex computer Y could tell if the program would complkete on computer X, but there will be other programs that computer Y will not be sure about.

Godel: any mathematical system contains true statemeant that cannot be proved within that system, even though they may be proved in a richer system that is set up to contain the original one. However the new system will itself have unprovable truths.

The more comlicated and complex a machine, or a mathematical system, gets the bigger and bigger the unprovable gaps get.

In the same way, there will be things the human brain can know that are beyond the human brain's wit to prove. This must be true even if our brains are totally deterministic - in which case the whole aesthetic, spiritual "dimension" of our existence is just how it feels to be a logical machine encountering an unprovable truth. Such feelings would be open to mathematical modelling by a more complex brain than ours, but would always remain beyond our own understanding.

In another way, those feelings would also be beyond the understanding of the super brain - by grasping the logical structure, the super brain would not experience our feelings the way we do, but differently. So they would have the structure but not the feeling.

River~~

River

Thank you for answering my question sir, your reply is truly inspiring.

God Bless You
Ernie
Team Art Bell

River
The answer is in the loving heart...
I pray our planet Earth can have a change of consciousness.
We should do this in memory of Jesus.
Ernie
Team Art Bell
God Bless us all

---

River
The answer is in the loving heart...
I pray our planet Earth can have a change of consciousness.

Ernesto,

yes, I believe so too. These things are beyond maths/physics, and in my opinion are far more important. The change that I feel is needed starts when an individual, any individual, each individual, decides to trust in the things that are beyond rational calculation.

We should do this in memory of Jesus.

One problem I have with many who profess to believe in the Biblical Jesus is that their belief turns the Bible into another logical theory. Here is the Word, and we will use human logic to prove that the Bible means This, and only This. There are those whose belief in Jesus means in practice that they allow a particular church to tell them what they should believe.

These people see faith as a single act of surrender to a single intellectual idea: that the Scripture (or their Church) is Infallible, and after that everything is to be deduced by logic and argument. Theological = trying to find God using logical processes. But logic cannot possibly encompass God, not even starting from a perfect set of axioms -- how could it, when it cannot even encompass human feeling?

Atheists believe that matter is all there is. Too many people say they remember Jesus and behave like matter is all that matters.

These are not, in my opinion, two separate problems, but two symptoms of the same mistake. If we treat faith as a kind of logic, we will treat spiritual things as just another kind of materialism.

I have also met other followers of Jesus whose faith seems different to all that. Whose ongoing search for Truth encompasses more than (theo)logical. Whose ongoing search for the Way leads them naturally into behaviour that values people above objects, and values the living world as more than just another commodity.

(Theo)-logically their churches disagree.

And I think I have seen the same fruits of the spirit in followers of other faiths, and in those who profess no faith at all.

(Theo)-logically the different faiths seem incompatible.

Yet beyond theology the fruits of the spiritual life seem to be the same.

So I agree with you, my friend, when you say the world needs a change in consciousness.

I believe that change will happen as / when / if individuals start to seek Truth that is beyond the logic and science.

You ask us to remember Jesus: well I say be careful not to turn Jesus into the "science" of theology. Theology is not the Way.

You ask us to remember Jesus: I know that many have found a living faith in seeking Him. I personally am not willing to say that Jesus is the *only* path to such a faith.

River~~

---

River
The answer is in the loving heart...
I pray our planet Earth can have a change of consciousness.

Ernesto,

yes, I believe so too. These things are beyond maths/physics, and in my opinion are far more important. The change that I feel is needed starts when an individual, any individual, each individual, decides to trust in the things that are beyond rational calculation.

We should do this in memory of Jesus.

One problem I have with many who profess to believe in the Biblical Jesus is that their belief turns the Bible into another logical theory. Here is the Word, and we will use human logic to prove that the Bible means This, and only This. There are those whose belief in Jesus means in practice that they allow a particular church to tell them what they should believe.

These people see faith as a single act of surrender to a single intellectual idea: that the Scripture (or their Church) is Infallible, and after that everything is to be deduced by logic and argument. Theological = trying to find God using logical processes. But logic cannot possibly encompass God, not even starting from a perfect set of axioms -- how could it, when it cannot even encompass human feeling?

Atheists believe that matter is all there is. Too many people say they remember Jesus and behave like matter is all that matters.

These are not, in my opinion, two separate problems, but two symptoms of the same mistake. If we treat faith as a kind of logic, we will treat spiritual things as just another kind of materialism.

I have also met other followers of Jesus whose faith seems different to all that. Whose ongoing search for Truth encompasses more than (theo)logical. Whose ongoing search for the Way leads them naturally into behaviour that values people above objects, and values the living world as more than just another commodity.

(Theo)-logically their churches disagree.

And I think I have seen the same fruits of the spirit in followers of other faiths, and in those who profess no faith at all.

(Theo)-logically the different faiths seem incompatible.

Yet beyond theology the fruits of the spiritual life seem to be the same.

So I agree with you, my friend, when you say the world needs a change in consciousness.

I believe that change will happen as / when / if individuals start to seek Truth that is beyond the logic and science.

You ask us to remember Jesus: well I say be careful not to turn Jesus into the "science" of theology. Theology is not the Way.

You ask us to remember Jesus: I know that many have found a living faith in seeking Him. I personally am not willing to say that Jesus is the *only* path to such a faith.

River~~

River,
I understand sir. Both you and Jesus are insperations in your own ways.
A change of consciousness (yes)...
Thanks for helping me find my path of knowledge and wisdom.
God Bless You

Ernie S.
Team Art Bell
P.S. Ride the graviton with love...

---

River
The answer is in the loving heart...
I pray our planet Earth can have a change of consciousness.

Ernesto,

yes, I believe so too. These things are beyond maths/physics, and in my opinion are far more important. The change that I feel is needed starts when an individual, any individual, each individual, decides to trust in the things that are beyond rational calculation.

We should do this in memory of Jesus.

One problem I have with many who profess to believe in the Biblical Jesus is that their belief turns the Bible into another logical theory. Here is the Word, and we will use human logic to prove that the Bible means This, and only This. There are those whose belief in Jesus means in practice that they allow a particular church to tell them what they should believe.

These people see faith as a single act of surrender to a single intellectual idea: that the Scripture (or their Church) is Infallible, and after that everything is to be deduced by logic and argument. Theological = trying to find God using logical processes. But logic cannot possibly encompass God, not even starting from a perfect set of axioms -- how could it, when it cannot even encompass human feeling?

Atheists believe that matter is all there is. Too many people say they remember Jesus and behave like matter is all that matters.

These are not, in my opinion, two separate problems, but two symptoms of the same mistake. If we treat faith as a kind of logic, we will treat spiritual things as just another kind of materialism.

I have also met other followers of Jesus whose faith seems different to all that. Whose ongoing search for Truth encompasses more than (theo)logical. Whose ongoing search for the Way leads them naturally into behaviour that values people above objects, and values the living world as more than just another commodity.

(Theo)-logically their churches disagree.

And I think I have seen the same fruits of the spirit in followers of other faiths, and in those who profess no faith at all.

(Theo)-logically the different faiths seem incompatible.

Yet beyond theology the fruits of the spiritual life seem to be the same.

So I agree with you, my friend, when you say the world needs a change in consciousness.

I believe that change will happen as / when / if individuals start to seek Truth that is beyond the logic and science.

You ask us to remember Jesus: well I say be careful not to turn Jesus into the "science" of theology. Theology is not the Way.

You ask us to remember Jesus: I know that many have found a living faith in seeking Him. I personally am not willing to say that Jesus is the *only* path to such a faith.

River~~

River,
I understand sir, faith not custom.
A change of consciousness (yes)...
Thanks for helping me find my path of knowledge and wisdom.
God Bless You

Ernie S.
Team Art Bell
P.S. Ride the graviton with love...

---

A change of consciousness (yes)...
Thanks for helping me find my path of knowledge and wisdom.

and thank you for a thoughtful series of questions

God Bless You

and may Truth lead your spirit

River~~

I don't want to burst anyone's bubble (well, actually I do) but the "dimension of feelings" is not beyond math and physics.

I studied psychology and if more people would take that branch of science as a serious science we would have less of these discussions. Thanks to neuropsychology, we know that feelings are the results of biochemical reactions in the brain.

I'd invite all of you to read at least about the limbic system to grasp some of the basic notions.

As a computer can produce complex and wonderful things on a monitor while still using only 1s ans 0s, the human "computer" can have a variety of complex experiences while using "basic" chemical reactions.

Also of interest is the fact that emotions have been scientifically studied in other animals. After seeing that monkeys have a sense of justice, morality and that they also feel empathy for others, humans can't be seriously considered as superior to other animals. Our only "superior" ability is to make complex gadgets.

Of course you can still chose to believe in a god, but what is interesting is that with each new discovery since the beginning of time, god has lost some of his power.

Of course you can still chose to believe in a god, but what is interesting is that with each new discovery since the beginning of time, god has lost some of his power.

er no.

The Greeks had a world in series of crystal shells, possibly 1,000,000 km across (if they's used km in those days.) Those who believed in a Creator in those days believed S/He created were maybe 400 stars, which were each somewhat smaller thant the Earth.

We have a universe a billion light years across, and their may be up to 10^500 other variant universes next door, if some current theories are right. But ignone that speculation, suppose we just go for this one universe for the moment. Those who believe in a Creator these days believe S/He created billions of galaxies each of billions of stars in this universe.

Which universe is more awesome?

Which universe is a bigger tribute to any creator it may have?

The Greeks believed their universe to be unchanging beyond the orbit of the moon. Modern cosmology claims the universe to have evolved from an enormously hot compressed state to the current more sedate existence - which is the more exciting history?

I am somewhat agnostic over the God question, though possibly tending more towards belief than non-belief. I teach cosmology and this adds nothing either way to the argument about whether, or not, there is/was a Creator. But it does enhance the sense of awe for the Creator on the days when I believe.

R~~

I studied psychology and if more people would take that branch of science as a serious science we would have less of these discussions. Thanks to neuropsychology, we know that feelings are the results of biochemical reactions in the brain.

So true.

We know that the taste of food is a result of biochem in the mouth and nose, and of further biochem in the brain. We do not as a result lose interest in food.

We know that the joy of sex (as Alex comfort put it) is down to certain physio and biochem activities in the body and in the brain. We do not think that this means we lose interest in sex just because we understand it.

Ditto, ditto, ditto, any pleasurable or comforting activity may be explained in these terms, but very few are discounted simply because we understand a little about how the pleasure arises and what it is for.

Until we come to God, or gods, or religious feelings. Does not the same apply here? That understanding the mechanism behind the feeling does nothing to discount the importance, pleasure, or comfort of the feeling.

R~~

feelings can be caused by body chemistry, however, the
freedom of thought can allow a choice in how one feels;
this is the great advantage, i think, of seeing human
behavior from the point of view of scientific method...

psychology, as a natural science, was in my BS in 1980;
for me, to experiment was to go out to interview people!
by far one of the best is http://www.gallup.com so i
worked for them for many years interviewing people...

to see the infinite universe as separate from people can
make it impossible to experience life in a holistic way;
to include the 'dimension of feeling' in a scientific view
might require an understanding of nothingness and infinity:

nothing1
nothing2
emptiness

1. emptiness of concept might be the only way to see reality :)
2. using words to explain life is different from living life :)

by infinity, i mean every person has a different way of
experiencing reality, so every point of view is needed;
reality might be the experience of ALL sentient beings!
then reality is an infinite set of different experiences :)

I studied psychology and if more people would take that branch of science as a serious science we would have less of these discussions. Thanks to neuropsychology, we know that feelings are the results of biochemical reactions in the brain.

So true.

We know that the taste of food is a result of biochem in the mouth and nose, and of further biochem in the brain. We do not as a result lose interest in food.

We know that the joy of sex (as Alex comfort put it) is down to certain physio and biochem activities in the body and in the brain. We do not think that this means we lose interest in sex just because we understand it.

Ditto, ditto, ditto, any pleasurable or comforting activity may be explained in these terms, but very few are discounted simply because we understand a little about how the pleasure arises and what it is for.

Until we come to God, or gods, or religious feelings. Does not the same apply here? That understanding the mechanism behind the feeling does nothing to discount the importance, pleasure, or comfort of the feeling.

R~~

River~~
Since General Relativity & Quantum Mechanics break down in a black hole and thier is nowhere to turn. Is it possible that something in Thought(feeling), matter, & energy is an unopened door to the missing link of entering into one.

Mr. Rookie
Ernie
Team Art Bell

---