Consciousness is the quality or state of being aware of an external object or something within oneself.
It has been defined as: subjectivity, awareness, sentience, the ability to experience or to feel, wakefulness, having a sense of selfhood, and the executive control system of the mind.
Well, I've been thinking about Biocentrism for some time now.....
For those who may not know about it here is some back ground about Robert Lanza, he seems to be the leading figure head of the theory due to his scientific background and sharp brain.
''Robert Lanza, M. D. is considered one of the leading scientists in the world. He is currently Chief Scientific Officer at Advanced Cell Technology, and Adjunct Professor at Wake Forest University School of Medicine. He has hundreds of publications and inventions, and over 30 scientific books: among them, “Principles of Tissue Engineering,” which is recognized as the definitive reference in the field. Others include One World: The Health & Survival of the Human Species in the 21st Century (Foreword by former President and Nobel laureate Jimmy Carter), and the “Handbook of Stem Cells” and “Essentials of Stem Cell Biology,” which are considered the definitive references in stem cell research''
So he would 'normally' be known as a main stream scientist.
Instead of myself going on too much about this right now, I have provided a short clip from YouTube where Lanza discusses time&space, on a 'science and non duality' presentation.
And a link to a biocentrism website where information on the topic can be sourced, and frequently asked questions are answered.
There is also four good short clips, they only last about four minutes each, so not a drag to watch but quite interesting to those who indulge in such information (such as I). >>>>> biocentricity.net/
I'd like to have opinions, to me it seems to make sense as I can practically take on board the theory that they're proposing, it's not the usual 'upper consciousness'' nonsense.
I would like to read the transcript, but cannot follow him on video. Is he on about the same kind of stuff as Dr Bruce Lipton?
Not quite, I think what he's saying is that according to biocentrism time&space is in our heads, that's why time is relevant to the observer.
And that life did not come out of the universe, but that the universe comes out of life, so that when the first life forms appeared the universe would only exist as their perception, what ever their perception was, and as life has become more complex, the universe has too.
If you look at the four short clips on the webpage it's explained very clearly.
I had a scan of biocentricity.net and quickly came to the, bollox, conclusion.
Oh, I guess you must have thought, what's all this bollox then?
No, I thought, this is bollox.
In saying that, I mean holistically. There are some valid points made within the theory but notions such as a separate universe for each evolutionary wave crest are plainly, bollox.
"laws are unenforceable if the majority break them."-humanspirit,
"avoid the concept of an ambassador for truth altogether"-gilly.
Kind of like does a falling tree make a sound if there's nobody there to hear it?
No it doesn't.
It makes changes to it's surrounding by changing it's circumstances. An ear is required for that change to be interpreted as a sound.
The energy 'released' is the energy 'released', across a spectrum. Whether an observer chooses to evolve an ear and a brain to interpret a teeny weeny portion of it and give it the name, 'sound' or not has no discernible effect on the energy 'released'.
"laws are unenforceable if the majority break them."-humanspirit,
"avoid the concept of an ambassador for truth altogether"-gilly.
Kind of like does a falling tree make a sound if there's nobody there to hear it?
No it doesn't.
It makes changes to it's surrounding by changing it's circumstances. An ear is required for that change to be interpreted as a sound.
I wonder if a new device was invented that could detect a slight sound, that had never before been detected, would that mean that the sound did not exist prior to the invention of the device, and does this also mean in effect the listening device is making the sound?
Kind of like does a falling tree make a sound if there's nobody there to hear it?
No it doesn't.
It makes changes to it's surrounding by changing it's circumstances. An ear is required for that change to be interpreted as a sound.
I wonder if a new device was invented that could detect a slight sound, that had never before been detected, would that mean that the sound did not exist prior to the invention of the device, and does this also mean in effect the listening device is making the sound?
The machine would be made to interpret it as sound, before this invention it didn't exist as sound, no.
Kind of like does a falling tree make a sound if there's nobody there to hear it?
No it doesn't.
It makes changes to it's surrounding by changing it's circumstances. An ear is required for that change to be interpreted as a sound.
I wonder if a new device was invented that could detect a slight sound, that had never before been detected, would that mean that the sound did not exist prior to the invention of the device, and does this also mean in effect the listening device is making the sound?
The human ear is so sensitive that in an anechoic chamber it can perceive air molecules bouncing off the ear drum.
It is impossible to hear any sounds quieter than that because they would be masked by this sensation. But since sound is essentially vibration of air molecules I can't think how any sound could be quieter because it would have to include the vibration of air molecules (or any other medium through which sound can travel.)
Kind of like does a falling tree make a sound if there's nobody there to hear it?
No it doesn't.
It makes changes to it's surrounding by changing it's circumstances. An ear is required for that change to be interpreted as a sound.
I wonder if a new device was invented that could detect a slight sound, that had never before been detected, would that mean that the sound did not exist prior to the invention of the device, and does this also mean in effect the listening device is making the sound?
The human ear is so sensitive that in an anechoic chamber it can perceive air molecules bouncing off the ear drum.
It is impossible to hear any sounds quieter than that because they would be masked by this sensation. But since sound is essentially vibration of air molecules I can't think how any sound could be quieter because it would have to include the vibration of air molecules (or any other medium through which sound can travel.)
NASA has listening devices that can detect sound/vibration beyond human hearing.
What I'm getting at is that if a monitoring device is invented today, it can pick up vibrational frequencies that are beyond human perception, such as a 'dog whistle' but perhaps 1000's of times finer.
In the construction of theory, did this newly detected sound exist before the application of the new device, and is the device in effect creating the sound?
Kind of like does a falling tree make a sound if there's nobody there to hear it?
No it doesn't.
It makes changes to it's surrounding by changing it's circumstances. An ear is required for that change to be interpreted as a sound.
I wonder if a new device was invented that could detect a slight sound, that had never before been detected, would that mean that the sound did not exist prior to the invention of the device, and does this also mean in effect the listening device is making the sound?
The human ear is so sensitive that in an anechoic chamber it can perceive air molecules bouncing off the ear drum.
It is impossible to hear any sounds quieter than that because they would be masked by this sensation. But since sound is essentially vibration of air molecules I can't think how any sound could be quieter because it would have to include the vibration of air molecules (or any other medium through which sound can travel.)
NASA has listening devices that can detect sound/vibration beyond human hearing.
What I'm getting at is that if a monitoring device is invented today, it can pick up vibrational frequencies that are beyond human perception, such as a 'dog whistle' but perhaps 1000's of times finer.
In the construction of theory, did this newly detected sound exist before the application of the new device, and is the device in effect creating the sound?
Sorry, by 'slight sound' I thought you were referring to amplitude rather than frequency.
Yes it's possible for equipment to detect frequencies beyond human hearing range because again it is simply a vibration of air molecules. If sound is only what can be perceived, then the equipment is not detecting sound.
Think of ultrasound.... this works by an ultra high rate of air molecules vibrating - but although it's called ultra-'sound', it's not possible to perceive it as such.
The dog whistle is a good analogy. Blow it in a room full of dog ears what it makes is a sound, a room full of human ears and it makes no sound ergo it is the ear that makes it sound.
The EPA (environmental protection agency) and OSHA took air samples in the days following September 11th, they reported that they found no excessive levels of asbestos contrary to other findings....
With the anniversary of September 11th literally just around the corner, unanswered questions still remain for families who lost loved ones during the tragic event, as well as from families...
In 2008 the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to review a series of lower court rulings that restrict the United States Navy's use of sonar in submarine detection training exercises off...
Whether its 50 cents or five dollars, your donations are appreciated and help keep this community site running so we can all continue to enjoy using it.
This target is to meet our server cost for one year, June 2020 - May 2021,
in USD.
No one is obliged to donate, please only donate what you can afford. Even the smallest amount helps. Being an active member is a positive contribution. Thank You.
Today353 Yesterday779 Week4314 Month27310 Total1005667 Your IP Address: 216.73.217.125Your Browser and OS: Unknown - UnknownSaturday, 18 April 2026 12:05
Who Is Online
Guests : 1458 guests onlineMembers : No members online
Well, I've been thinking about Biocentrism for some time now.....
