Theos-Talk Archives (July 2007 Message tt00182)

How physics and metaphysics are beginning to meet...

yanniru@netscape.net wrote on 7/10/07, 12:15 PM:
>  Subject: Re: [Mind and Brain] Re: [SPACETIMEandCONSCIOUSNESS] Digest 
> Number 112
> Date: 7/10/07, 12:15 PM
> From: yanniru@netscape.net
> To: MindBrain@yahoogroups.com
> Leon,
>   
>  The smallest particle in string theory is the closed string of diameter 
> equal, more or less, to a Planck length. So that is likely to be the zero-point 
> of anything in nature.
> 
> Not necessarily so.  According to the ABC field geometry -- that closed 
string apparently coincides with the lower order ZPE field in the Planck hyperspace 
of the physical plane (third fractal involution) -- which is analogous to the 
initial primal ABC field at the beginning of Cosmogenesis.  This Primal field 
is fractally divided into twin inner fields that make up the initial 
continuously stable three cycle Mobius-Klein spiral vortex loop.  Also see: 
http://users.aol.com/uniwldarts/uniworld.artisans.guild/3cyclefield.gif ;

>  
>  Now the closed circular string, perhaps what you are referring to below, 
> has been solved exactly, by Brian Greene among others. He solved it while a 
> post-doc student at Harvard and presented his solution at the Northeastern 
> String and Cosmology Conference in 1988. I talked with about his work at that 
> conference as I wondered if his solution applied to the universe bounce theory. 
> Later at the same conference Hawking told me (via his computer) that the 
> universe did not bounce.
> 
>  I'm inclined to disagree with Hawking, since he later changed his ideas 
about information retention in black holes... Especially, since ABC suggests that 
the Universe continues to expand until all its stars and galaxies condense 
into their black hole's apparent "singularities" -- with the metric spacetime so 
extended as to resolve, at almost absolute zero, into its spin field BEC-like 
state.

This unified condition of near infinite total spin moments, then would appear 
like a super energetic cosmic "singularity"... That, after a period of rest 
-- apparently equivalent to the time of its existence since the last "big bang" 
-- it again springs to life and repeats the cycle of cosmogenesis an 
apparently new "big bang" -- which seemingly would occur everywhere, relatively 
simultaneously during inflation.  This would correspond to the bounce theory, but, 
probably based on a different premise -- since in ABC, the primal closed string 
of absolute ground SPACE of infinite angular momentum and pure consciousness 
would have to be one dimensional spin motion of zero diameter. 

Perhaps, the Greene solution could be applied to the resultant (after initial 
emanation) multidimensional geometric ABC field model -- which I have 
metaphorically pictured as bubbles within bubbles within bubbles, etc., that would 
holographically surround every zero-point in overall spherical space time.  See: 
http://users.aol.com/leonmaurer/Chakrafield-spherical-colo_F.jpg ; Thus, the 
ABC ZPE fields in the Planck space would be analogs of the ABC fields 
surrounding the entire universe and every particle and form in it -- from Galaxies on 
down through all forms of matter-energy, to quantum and sub quantum particles. 
Thereby accounting for the aura and chakra fields of the human body, etc.

> I mentioned Brian's solution to you about two years ago. But allow me to 
> repeat how I think it may support your ABC theory. The center of the circular 
> string is a special point as the surface of (a two-dimensional) universe is 
> mapped into it. Now the universe is more spherical than cylindrical. But the 
> solution is very suggestive.
> 
> In the two dimensional approximation our entire universe outside of the 
> string is mapped one-to-one to points on the inside in a r/p -> p/r scaling, 
> while maintaining direction, where p is the planck length and r the radial 
> coordinate. Thus this suggests that all the information in the universe is 
> available inside of each closed string.
> 
>  This is the kind of theoretical mathematical thinking that has to be added 
to the spherical topological geometry mathematics of the present ABC fractally 
involved field model to give it scientific credibility prior to its eventual 
experimental verification or other proofs.

> Therefore, this suggests to me that all the information in the universe is 
> available inside each particle, assuming of course that particles exist and 
> that string theory is correct and that a 2-d approximation is also good. Now 
> for me that sounds very much like each particle is conscious of the entire 
> universe, at least the closed circular string particles. So there is a zero 
> point center of consciousness that maps an infinity at its center, but it is not 
> an infinity of energy- it is an infinity of information.
> 
>  I think this view may clear up the misunderstanding that has plagued the ABC 
theory since I first presented it. The infinite divisibility, absolute 
inertia, infinite angular momentum, etc., was always intended to pertain to 
consciousness as well as information -- which are directly linked to the static center 
of consciousness and infinite non linear spin-wave (abstract motion) 
characteristics of the eternal timeless and dimensionless, and otherwise unconditioned 
primal SPACE itself.  This fundamental ground or super SPACE cannot be ruled 
out as the underlying basis of all conditioned reality -- regardless of its 
immateriality, or apparent non existence from the standpoint of conventional 
physics... Thus, accounting for the infinitely diverse forms of life, the endless 
expressions of creative imagination, as well as the unlimited range of 
potential sensory impressions, memory, etc., among all living organisms... Not to 
mention the ability of light to travel infinite distance in absolute vacuum.

> Now the megaspace I like to talk about which exists outside all universes 
> and permeates each one consists, according to string phenomenology, of only 
> closed strings, I postulate that the space of each universe also consists of 
> only closed strings (following Occum). That is, the particles of our space 
> itself are closed strings or loops, as in Loop Quantum Gravity. I wonder if the 
> loops somehow form a spherical surface.
> 
>  If your "megaspace" corresponds to at least the first derivative of the 
"absolute primal SPACE" (which I label "PRIMAL field" in my chakra field diagram) 
-- the closed strings could, apparently, correspond to the circular spin of 
that primal SPACE, as well as the individual lines of G-force that weaves the 
initial or hyperspace PRIMAL field.  The "loops," then -- since they correspond 
to the the way the initial triple loop ABC field is formed -- would most 
likely be both the individual rays that compose their Mobius-Klein like surface, 
and also the wave forms of the spherical particles they compose on the spherical 
surface of those initial ABC fields.  This seems like a reasonable  
correspondence between ABC, LQG, string, and even the holographic paradigm theories of 
Bohm, Pribram, Pauli, Schroedinger, et al.

I'm also almost sure that all parallel universes of the multiverse -- since 
they radiate from the same abstract spin motion as this universe (although from 
different sets of triple poles) -- would also have the same fundamental loop 
structures and spherical shapes of this universe -- including, presumably, the 
same or similar physical laws. 

> 
> Now the particles of space are stationary, you know, like at absolute zero. 
> So space itself is likely to be a BEC, as I think you said yourself. What 
> that means is that the consciousness of each particle of space is quantum 
> coherently extended to all space. Every point in space can sense every other point 
> in space. Space is a superfluid.
> 
> That is why gravity which in GR is equivalent to space itself, or at least 
> space curvature, is instantly felt through all space- even megaspace. That is 
> why gravity can escape a black hole. Now such extreme space distortions like 
> in a black hole may vibrate space particles to such an extent that they are 
> no longer quantum coherent- no longer part of the BEC of space. That would 
> provide for the loss of information derived for the Big Bang by Bojowald using 
> LQG and disconnect our universe space particles from the next universe, or as 
> Smolin proposes, the baby universe spawned by a black hole, as described in 
> the Bagavatum and in Hottentot poetry.
> 
> Another way to look at such consciousness is by way of the universe wave 
> function rather than on a particle basis. Wave/particle duality suggests that 
> space could be stationary loops or a stationary wave function. But separate 
> consciousnesses may exist. Dark matter and perhaps dark energy may have a 
> separate consciousness if they consist of BEC components. Iskakov's QIT, quantum 
> information theory, postulates that dark matter has several levels of 
> consciousnesses depending on how fine the dark matter particles are.
> 
>  Apparently. the ABC theory, like string theory, requires that the wave 
forms, loops or strings are the primary causes of all the particles.. including the 
microleptons of QIT.  In this view, since consciousness would have to 
originate in ALL spherical fields as a fundamental quality of the absolute primal 
SPACE that, as a BEC, underlies all spherical Universes as well as their three 
forms of light and dark matter -- there cannot be a "separate consciousness" -- 
since all those universes and their matter fields and forms would be conscious 
at their zeropoint instants of origination -- which is everywhere (and 
everywhen:-) throughout the entire multiverse, and within each universe. 

It's only the "phenomenal consciousness" associated with sentience that could 
vary and be different from each other -- depending on the neurochemical 
complexity of the organism.  But, the "observer consciousness" (i.e., potential 
awareness and will) would be everywhere (and everywhen), always potentially 
unchanged and fully accessible along with its individual self identity linked 
illusorily to its surrounding spin fields.  Each of us can individually verify that 
the subjective I AM witness consciousness we had at birth has never changed, 
although our objective "perceptive consciousness"  (i.e., self image, 
personality, knowledge, learning, training, etc.) has changed considerably.  

> An immediate question is "what are the wave function consciousness of 
> ordinary fermionic matter or ordinary bosons like the EM waves of photons?" 
> Following this paradigm, they also possess consciousness but it is limited by the 
> extent of their wave functions. Here we assume that the open strings of 
> fermions do not map the entire universe into itself. Self reflection as well as BEC 
> is a fundamental property of space particles- but not fermions. Fermions 
> must become bosons to get the extended consciousness of a BEC.
> 
> What about bosons as they have closed strings. My guess is that for example 
> photons, that are quantum coherent, have their planar strings aligned. That 
> differs from the closed strings of space which must have a spherical alignment 
> for them to have universal consciousness. Seems logical but still both are 
> assumptions.
> 
> I wonder if Cecil's theory could expose the kind of consciousness that 
> photons with aligned strings could have. Photons (and perhaps other massless 
> bosons like the graviton??) do not experience time. So in some sense their 
> consciousness is universal, but only in the direction of propagation of the photon. 
> Incoherent photons lose string alignment and become multi-directional thereby 
> diffusing consciousness. However, photons arriving here from the stars have 
> string alignment (except for atmospheric turbulence) and can be processed as 
> if coherent to give us consciousness of the stars.
> 
>  All the above depends on the type of consciousness considered.  As I see it, 
pure spiritual consciousness or potential observer-witness consciousness is 
everywhere...  And only its phenomenal expression or impression (will, qualia, 
perception, self identification, etc.) can vary over a tremendous range, 
depending on the complexity of the sentient organism.  Thus the phenomenal 
consciousness of any type of particle, string, atom, molecule, cell, organism etc., 
would be different... Yet, their potential absolute witness or I AM 
consciousness located IN the primal SPACE at their zeropoint instant around which their 
fields rotate -- would always be the same.  therefore, it's obvious that only 
phenomenal objective conscious varies.  But, it's apparent that at the quantum 
level at least, and perhaps through the mineral level, there could be no 
measurable expression or perception of such consciousness that we could imagine.  
(Although, we also can't speak for any sentient or perceptive beings that may 
exist on the higher order (astral) ABC field level above the physical fields we 
are considering here.:-).  However, I'm not so sure that the open string 
metaphor makes any sense in actual reality -- since such a string with free ends 
wouldn't have anything inertial center of origin to tie its wave vibration or 
standing wave to.  But, then, trying to graphically or structurally visualize 
quantum level wave phenomena, other than as endless spiral vortex loops of 
primal space motion, linked to a static center of origin, as in the ABC diagrams -- 
is almost impossible.  Although, it could be as simple as observing analogous 
wave patterns within and on the interface surface between liquids and gases.

> Well, I am getting off the track. To summarize, if the particles of space 
> are configured to have approximate spherical symmetry, then the center of each 
> sphere may map the spherical surface of the universe, which in turn via 
> holography maps the entire universe. But it is not infinite mass or energy that 
> is mapped but rather the information of where and how much mass and energy. 
> The actual mass or energy is scaled down by the ratio of the Planck length to 
> the radial distance to the mass in Brian's solution.
> 
>  Okay... But, that's only one possible solution -- which apparently deals 
only with the physical level of the initial ABC fields ... Especially if there 
are even higher order particles (and thus, masses) fields that are entirely 
symmetric in the distance between the smallest energy field in the Planck length 
and the absolute zeropoint instant of primal SPACE.  These fields would 
necessarily be spherical and -- as each of their zero-point centers still contains 
spin with infinite variations of angular momentum or potential energy -- the 
holographic mapping could still remain in those higher order hyperspace fields 
that are beyond metric physical spacetime -- e.g., the astral, mental, and 
spiritual levels of my cosmogenesis chakra field model.   Although, their 
electrodynamic interaction could very well be calculated mathematically, using 
micro-particle metaphors, as in QIT.

But, then, as you have pointed out (and I've agreed) -- since those fields 
can't be falsified by the methods of conventional reductive science, the ABC 
theory is philosophical, rather than "scientific" in the accepted physical 
sense.  However, I still consider it a scientifically rational metaphysical 
theory... At least, up to the stage of fractal field involution of cosmogenesis prior 
to the breaking of symmetry on the lowest frequency-energy order physical 
plane -- whose physics is almost fully known. 

But, we'll have to wait and see how all of this metaphysics interfaces with 
the cutting edges of modern physics, as it continues to evolve in its quest for 
a viable unified field theory of everything.  In my view, to be successful, 
they will eventually have to accept a purely metaphysical basis of fundamental 
reality.  Especially, since they would have to include the solutions to the 
hard problems of consciousness and brain mind binding... Not to mention, 
simultaneously solving all the equally hard problems of analog information 
transformation, transmission and detection between awareness, will, mind, memory, brain, 
senses and neuromuscular system, along with their body positional linkages to 
the 3-D holographic visual and aural images of the outer world -- already, 
hypothetically solved by the ABC field theory.

Leon

Richard



> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Leon Maurer <leonmaurer@aol.com>
> To: undisclosed-recipients:;
> Sent: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 1:05 am
> Subject: [Mind and Brain] Re: [SPACETIMEandCONSCIOUSNESS] Digest Number 112
> 
> 
> Edgar,
> 
> I hope you won't mind if I jump back in with some comments and questions 
> related to your STC paper at: http://edgarlowen.com/STC.pdf
> 
> If, as you say, time and space are traveling at the speed of light -- at the 
> beginning, prior to the big bang, when the universe was compressed at its 
> smallest spatial and shortest time dimension -- wouldn't that condition of 
> spacetime still have an even shorter time and space dimension between its outer 
> circumference and the exact zero-point singularity at its geometric center? 
> 
> Nowhere do I see in your theory, where there is considered a primal cause of 
> metric space, time, or consciousness (which apparently is non metric, 
> timeless and motionless everywhere it's located).  Thus, I cannot see how you can 
> say consciousness is the "stuff" of spacetime. Since, the images of spacetime 
> in conscious mind, experienced directly by the observer, are apparently only 
> the "contents of consciousness" -- but are not "consciousness" (awareness, 
> will, desire, intent, perception, discernment, discrimination, decision, etc., 
> etc.) per se.  However, if you could say that consciousness is the "root" of 
> spacetime, it might make more sense.
> 
> Wouldn't there also have to be a potential source of global consciousness at 
> that central point around which everything in the universe  rotates -- if, 
> as you imply, consciousness is a quality of the "singularity" of spacetime -- 
> which should be everywhere in the Planck vacuum, and, as I see it, have its 
> primal source at the zero-point center of the spherical universe at its 
> smallest compression? 
> 
> Although, I'm not so sure that the universe, which appears to be 
> holographic, could ever be in such a state -- even though SR and GR imply such a 
> condition.  I'm more inclined to believe that primal SPACE is more like a B-E 
> condensate that, counter intuitively, consists of an infinite number of such 
> zero-points at zero degrees Kelvin acting everywhere as if it were a singularity.  
> Therefore, I don't think the UNIVERSE collapses into itself, as some 
> scientists picture it, but simply expands indefinitely until IT freezes into its near 
> (if not) infinite black holes' zero-point spin fields, that each contain all 
> ITS holographic structural information (encoded as wave interference 
> patterns) -- until it's next cycle of manifestation, or awakening, causes it to 
> physically reappear, and be mathematically described, and presumably observed as 
> if it were a big bang expanding out of a single point. This is what I see as 
> the illusion of spacetime and mass-energy that are the objects of the 
> ubiquitous subjective observers -- who are conditioned by their senses to twist 
> everything into a physical model... And, why the Zen practice, you also quote, 
> says that one must fully experience the existing reality to finally realize the 
> underlying unity of everything in pure awakened cosmic consciousness.  This 
> is the state of Samadhi in the Vedic and Buddhist philosophy.
> 
> Doesn't all this mean that metric space must be a condition of an absolute 
> unconditioned primal SPACE -- that, along with its inherent potential 
> consciousness and noumenal matter, is forever beyond all physical space and time -- 
> yet, the esssential ground unlying all of it? Wouldn't that also make 
> subjective human consciousness entirely separate from objective space, time and all 
> material substance, and also, eternal -- as taught by all Zen (Chan, Dhyan, 
> Dzyan) Buddhist masters who also believe in reincarnation?  This seems 
> reasonable, since we are each also part of that hologram -- which replicates itself 
> at every zero-point, metric or otherwise.  Doesn't this also coincide with the 
> Buddhist concepts of there being no abiding individual self?  And that 
> consciousness and matter are dependently arising?
> 
> Can we imagine any spherical field of spacetime, existing in absolute empty 
> SPACE as pure energy or circumferential vibrational waves of that SPACE, and 
> not having its initial centrifugal origin at the zero-point center of that 
> field, as well as every sub field within and surrounding it?  How could any 
> single (one dimensional) circular line, ray or string of force endlessly weaving 
> a spherical fields not originate centrifugally from its zero-point center -- 
> especially if that geometric point was fundamentally circular (as spin) 
> itself, metric or not?  See: 
> http://users.aol.com/uniwldarts/uniworld.artisans.guild/3cyclefield.gif ;
> 
> Such a beginning seems to be the only way the entire physical spacetime 
> continuum -- starting at every zero-point center of ZPE in the Planck space, to 
> the furthest extent of cosmic space -- could originate periodically. Each time 
> at a higher level of experiential intelligence.  See:  
> http://users.aol.com/leonmaurer/Chakrafield-spherical-colo_F.jpg
> 
> Doesn't relativity theory imply that the singularity must have immense, if 
> not infinite potential energy, in order to empower that spacetime expansion 
> and also furnish and support all the mass-energy throughout the cosmos? 
> 
> Wouldn't that initial expansion have to be impelled outward by a near 
> infinite force of repulsive gravitation?  Why wouldn't that positive and negative 
> gravitational force, which cannot arise out of nothing, not have to be due to 
> the initial spin momentum in opposite directions on only one axes of the 
> spherical zero-point center of the overall expanding field of spacetime?   Also, 
> how does your theory explain the continued acceleration of universal 
> expansion due to so called Dark Matter?  And, how would it explain the cause of such 
> matter that, apparently, is at least double the mass-energy of our visible 
> spacetime?  (The dark matter spacetime fields could be spinning on the two 
> other axes.)
> 
> As I see it, while we cannot give IT any attributes, or comprehend what IT 
> is composed of... Since IT is beyond all finite thought or 
> conceptualizations... That ineffable zero-point of absolute SPACE and its infinite abstract 
> motion (angular momentum), located everywhere in the Plank vacuum, would have to 
> be the primal source of both consciousness and spacetime, along with all the 
> fractally involved higher order hyperspace fields (the "quantum foam") -- 
> whose ZPE energizes and supports all the quantum particle fields of mass-energy 
> surrounding IT.
> 
> This is the only way I can imagine (1) explaining the holographic nature of 
> the spacetime universe, our inner vision, the DNA molecule located in every 
> cell of every sentient being -- whose inner and surrounding fractal field 
> structures, at their highest human expression, are the reflections of the entire 
> ideal macrocosm...  And (2) also explaining the holographic informational 
> linkages between consciousness (awareness, will) and the fields of mind, memory, 
> brain, body, senses in perfect correlation with the holographic visual and 
> aural image reflections of the outer world.  IOW, how zero-point 
> consciousness, as an absolute reference point between the observer/perceiver and the outer 
> world, allows the ball player to catch a high fly on the run and jump?  Or, 
> how we can pinpoint the exact location of a particular instrument in a 
> symphony orchestra, etc.?  For an overview of these fields in the human body and 
> their esoteric Buddhist correlations, see:
> http://users.aol.com/leonmaurer/Chakrafielddiag-fig.col.jpg
> http://users.aol.com/uniwldarts/uniworld.artisans.guild/chakrafield.html
> http://users.aol.com/leonmaurer/THOTH_IN_DIAMOND_SAMADHI.jpg
> 
> 
> Thus, it appears that consciousness is far more than simply spacetime or a 
> function of it.
> 
> There's more questions about the STC theory I'd like to discuss with you -- 
> with reference to my ABC hypothesis... But this is enough for now.  Note that 
> these are serious problems in your theory -- which if unanswered will make 
> it as incomplete as is every other theory of physics... That, so far, have not 
> been able to solve the hard problems initially posed by Chalmers (of 
> explaining the experience of consciousness and mind-brain binding). 
> 
> I hope that our dialogue might lead to answers that would be acceptable to 
> all disciplines.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Leon
>  

Check Out the new free AIM(R) Mail -- Unlimited storage and industry-leading 
spam and email virus protection.




**************************************
 Get a sneak peek of the 
all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]