Philosophy Now Forum

My point was that its not the measuring of the limit that our consciousness is stationary to. Its the knowledge of the limit that is a part of consiousness that is stationary.

But your point was that it is consciousness that does the measuring and causes the supposed collapse of events. Whereas I think that since a machine can measure and cause the collapse consciousness is not needed to fix the limit.

Well nicely put arising . But the way I see it on knowing the relativity of consciousness to the limit.conscioueness joins in as a part of the collapsing thing.

You're not the only one rexamining black holes, jackles: http://www.wired.com/2014/10/astrophysi ... lack-hole/

Yes my idea here on black holes is that there centre goes out of happening existance and as such stops moving in a happening relative way.wheres all the stuff gone then.why back to certainty of course.

jackles wrote:Well nicely put arising . But the way I see it on knowing the relativity of consciousness to the limit.conscioueness joins in as a part of the collapsing thing.

You're still not explaining how it is that a machine manages to 'collapse' whatever it is you are talking about?

Is what your saying that the machine measures the speed of light which causes and action in the event.

If I understand you then yes I'm saying that the machine measures the speed of light and based upon this the cat-feeder produces food. As such no consciousness was necessary to cause the event apart from the consciousness that built the machine but I think this differs from your claim that a consciousness needs to be present to instigate such a measurement.