"Does his theory then help explain the quantum states of electrons in atoms?'
I'm not sure, I haven't seen the actual paper, never mind the book he's working on... Anything is possible.
The human perception of time as a sequence of moments is just a neurological artifact, an outgrowth of the chunk-by-chunk way our brains perceive reality.
This guy is probably right. It reminds me of the current neuroscience study about how people have visions of "God" and that a particular area of the brain can be stimulated to induce visions... And people have visions of whatever they have been brought up to believe in. There is no cross-pollination of visions - you don't see Buddhists having Xtian visions and so forth. All about the sense of perception.
And as far as the brief history bit at the end. When you look at it from an objective standpoint, it seems like a LOGICAL next step in the theory production process. Nothing is as simple as it seems, according to Complexity/Chaos theories. And complexity doesn't imply nonsensical. Usually the simplest explanations are the ones that don't make any sense - at least on the "explaining the universe" level. Although I think it is true on the personal motivation and a lot of other levels too.
I wonder how our brains would perceive reality if we were able to consciously use more of our brain that we do right now. What are we up to now? 10%?
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2005-06-05 10:04 pm (UTC)I'm not sure, I haven't seen the actual paper, never mind the book he's working on... Anything is possible.
The human perception of time as a sequence of moments is just a neurological artifact, an outgrowth of the chunk-by-chunk way our brains perceive reality.
This guy is probably right. It reminds me of the current neuroscience study about how people have visions of "God" and that a particular area of the brain can be stimulated to induce visions... And people have visions of whatever they have been brought up to believe in. There is no cross-pollination of visions - you don't see Buddhists having Xtian visions and so forth. All about the sense of perception.
And as far as the brief history bit at the end. When you look at it from an objective standpoint, it seems like a LOGICAL next step in the theory production process. Nothing is as simple as it seems, according to Complexity/Chaos theories. And complexity doesn't imply nonsensical. Usually the simplest explanations are the ones that don't make any sense - at least on the "explaining the universe" level. Although I think it is true on the personal motivation and a lot of other levels too.
I wonder how our brains would perceive reality if we were able to consciously use more of our brain that we do right now. What are we up to now? 10%?