Why the scientists won't accept the Conscious Universe Model

[NucleicAcid]

I was pondering, as always, and frustrated by the scientific community's difficulty with accepting the Conscious Universe/Infinite Consciousness model of reality. At one point, the scientific consensus was that Classical Mechanics explained all that there was to be explained, and the only things left to do were to just narrow in on specific details of things. Then they ran into a handful of hangups and realized there were issues with CM. That gave birth to Relativity and Quantum Mechanics. They explain a bigger part of the picture than CM. We know QM is incomplete, and thus physicists are busily trying to come up with it's replacement. Certain esoteric models, like Conscious Universe, explain all of that stuff, plus psi, but those models can't explain psi, so Conscious Universe is the more powerful model. It also explains away its own inconsistencies, like the capriciousness of psi research, quite nicely.

But then I realized, idea of universal consciousness/infinite potential Buddhist sort of outlook essentially explains everything.



How long is it before we just go, "Well, since the universe needed the ability to create everything in order to create anything, it must still be able to create any possible scenario it could potentially run into, so technically everything is possible, if not here, then somewhere." Well obviously never. That sort of thing would be PREPOSTEROUS for the scientific community to announce. Totally unfalsifiable, really no grounds for making a testable hypothesis, it's anti science. Then I was like, wait a minute, infinite potential? That's basically another way of saying God.

Science, with its very strong Atheist contingent, especially the vocal ones of the Shermer/Dawkins variety (I'm convinced they're merely two different robots of the same make and model ) would not be caught dead admitting that anything along the lines of a universal consciousness exists, because it is synonymous with God. And therefore, it shuns anything that even comes close to suggesting it, like psi. It's "I wouldn't believe it even if it were true." So from their point of view, the model of the universe that they want to be true is the one that is finite, because they eventually want science to be able to explain the whole thing. They will insist that the best model is one that circumscribes all that we know, but is still small enough to be totally figured out, because that's how they see the world, and that's what they want. They say things like Psi and God and the origin of the universe will eventually be explained away because science is always moving forward, and as it develops, it explains more and more of what once was superstition and myth.

However, by their own pattern of thought, they should realize that any given model of the universe they could come up with, must be incomplete and will eventually be replaced.

But alas, this would make their attempt at figuring out everything futile. So they fight against anything that suggests that their way of looking at the world is incomplete, and use some extremely solid logic to do so. Because by their meter, everything is explainable, even things yet to be explained.

Aaaand that's circular logic.

Tada. Go back to bed America. I've figured out everything. Again.

[Craig Browning]

I want this piece for a book I've been working on

Down-right awesome!

[NucleicAcid]

Steal the ideas. It's not like I didn't assimilate all those ideas from various other places It's really just some simple inferences about the way models evolve and replace each other, and how people stick to the old models with much zeal.