Theos-Talk Archives (November 2007 Message tt00002)

On Oct 31, 2007, at 10/31/0711:40 PM, Robert Karl Stonjek wrote:
> LM:
> I never denied that the sensory image information has to be  
> processed through the visual brain chain, before it can be  
> perceived as a quale by consciousness... And, either interpreted  
> properly, or wrongly if the information is ambiguous or missing  
> some essential components due to brain lesions or otherwise.  But,  
> I never implied that consciousness has any "magical form" or that  
> it could not be fooled by so called "illusions" that are simply  
> ambiguous or rivaling informational wave interference patterns,  
> caused by the visual objects themselves -- independent of the  
> neurology of the brain -- unless that neurology is faulty in the  
> same sense of inductive interferences caused by damage to the  
> shielding of an electrical conductor, or malfunctioning of a  
> transistor, capacitor, inductor, or resistor in a television cable  
> communication network system.
>
> But you have never proved that the perception itself is a function  
> of any part of the brain's neurology or processing.  Especially,  
> since such information leading to perception would have to be  
> ultimately transmitted as frequency modulations on radiant  
> electromagnetic fields in order to be detected and experienced by  
> consciousness (awareness, will, etc.)... And, since it's also  
> obvious that such EM fields, at the lowest order physical level of  
> the brain, would have to be resonant with analogous higher order  
> fields that are closer in energy and frequency to the infinite spin  
> momental force at the zero-point of consciousness.... Which I see  
> as absolutely essential in order to explain the near infinite  
> subtleties of images in the mind, real or imaginary, that  
> consciousness is capable of perceiving, or memory, down to the  
> archetypal level, is capable of storing for ages if not eons of time.
>
> RKS:
> Where do you get this 'electromagnetic' component from?  Why do you  
> think EM fields are involved?  The brain runs on electro-chemical  
> inter-cell communication, not electromagnetic.  There is a very  
> small induced magnetic field along the axon but it plays no actual  
> role in inter-cell communication.

Nevertheless, all electro-chemical transformations between the  
synapses have to be accompanied by electromagnetic fields -- with the  
magnetic radiation component carrying the frequency modulated  
information transformed at each electro-chemical juncture of inter-  
and intracellular transmission along the path of frequency modulated  
electric current flowing through the axons (most likely as Ca+ ions)  
and transmitted across the synapses.

These modulated EM field pulses discharged at each neural synaptic  
junction must radiate outward, combine with the information from  
adjacent neuron paths, and simultaneously, harmonically resonate with  
and transform their information to their coadunate higher order  
fractally involved coenergetic ZPE fields in the Planck vacuum  
closest to the ultra-sensitive zero-point of perceptive  
consciousness.  It's obvious that the lowest frequency-energy order  
of these fields would represent the short term "flash" information  
perceived in the mind; with the next higher order being the  
relatively short term working memory; the third being the long term  
memory, and the fourth, the archetypal memory. Also, since these  
fields would be of high inductive resonance sensitivity to magnetic  
vibration, due to their proximity to the zero-point -- the induced  
magnetic information fields in the neurons, at similarly close  
proximity, would NOT have to be of any substantially measurable high  
energy level.

According to this view, based on the proven existence of the ZPE  
fields, their higher order frequency-energy phases, and their  
individual chains of harmonic fields of varying extension and  
duration -- I can see no other way to explain the combination of the  
different neuron processed elements into the coherent assembled image  
matrix that we actually directly perceive as a spherical holographic  
field in the mind -- than by the simultaneous "entanglement" of all  
zero-points of perception located ubiquitously throughout the entire  
brain-body. Therefore, all the pixels of the retina images are  
directly perceived (as a simultaneous holographic gestalt) at the  
zero-point in the center of the brain -- appearing as an actual  
reflection of the spherical mind field surface surrounding that point.

The only way that could occur, is if the ZP consciousness projects a  
coherent ray of its spin-momental energy that holographically  
reconstructs the interference patterns in the ZPE mind field and  
reflects it back to the point of consciousness.

This would also account for the instantaneous coordination of the  
electrodynamic 3D holographic kinetic body image map, generated  
within the fore-brain, with the visual image generated in the rear- 
brain -- so as to enable precise placement of any part of the body  
within the outer objective field.  This is the only way I can imagine  
how the frequency modulated holistic images in the mind, composed of  
different elements processed at different locations in the brain, are  
assembled and bonded with the body field and the world field in the  
mind field -- with the brain serving solely as the intermediate  
information transformer/processor/channeler between the senses, the  
neuromuscular system, the mind-memory fields, and the zero-points of  
entangled consciousness.

Nature would have to be utterly stupid if the mechanisms and  
integrated network systems of consciousness were any more complex  
than that.  Not to say that the physiology of the analog neurological  
processes aren't complex in themselves,  But, then, so is the  
circuitry and electromagnetic processes of an analog or digital TV  
camera, recording, transmission and receiver-monitor system. :-)

In a nutshell... The above explanation of the processes and  
mechanisms of consciousness are based on the proposition that; The  
entire universe is, fundamentally, nothing more than lines of primal  
±G-force, of an electro-magnetic nature, emanated and radiated --  
from the spin-momentum of a potentially conscious zero-point  
"singularity" of Absolute Primal Space (as postulated by general  
relativity)... That form spherical fields which fractally involve,  
spiral vortically, in descending orders of frequency energy... With  
the initial triune fields containing, as encoded interference  
patterns on their overall circumference, all the holographic  
structural and experiential information accumulated during previous  
cycles of phenomenal cosmic existence.  After the third fractal  
iteration, these initial fields, at their lowest (fourth level)  
frequency energy spectrum order after initial inflation, break  
symmetry, and begin the formation of fundamental particles that  
subsequently evolve into the cosmos and all sentient beings... Whose  
continued evolution, ultimately ends up as self conscious human  
beings. See <http://members.aol.com/leonmaurer/Chakrafield-spherical- 
col_3.jpg>
>
> Why do you think consciousness requires an electromagnetic field?   
> Where is the evidence for that???

There is no objective evidence... Since the higher order coenergetic  
(electrodynamic) sub quantum fields -- that are postulated to be the  
ultimate "carriers" of the wave interference patterned information  
capable of being detected and discriminated as vibrational pressures  
or phonons by each conscious zero-point of absolute reference (which  
I assume is a necessity by logical reasoning based on the  
"singularity" origin of the cosmos as well as the origin and  
energizing of all the fundamental particles) -- would have to be  
located everywhere in the Planck vacuum.  Therefore, they can be only  
indirectly proven to exist (Casimir) as well as entangled (Aspect) --  
but cannot be further observed, interactively, using the present  
instruments of science.

There are several mathematical theories, however, such as string,  
axion, tachyon, micro-lepton, LQG, QFT, etc., that more or less prove  
the existence of such higher order hyperspace fields and their  
associated strings and micro-particles -- also, still yet to be  
proved empirically or evidentially.  In fact, however, there are  
reports of research in Russia that may have empirically or  
experimentally proven the existence of some of these exotic particles  
and fields -- that seem to be consistent with Maxwell-Ampere-Faraday  
equations that Einstein based his theory of General Relativity on.  
(Another reason to assume that the universe is fundamentally  
electrical in nature -- which must include the physical information  
of consciousness.)

So far, no brain research, examining the neural processes pertaining  
to the transformation of sensory image information of a modulated  
vibratory nature -- so as to be detectable and interpreted by pure  
subjective consciousness -- has ever come up with an explanation (as  
reasonably and thoroughly as outlined above) that answers all the  
questions and solves all the hard problems of subjective  
consciousness and its informational interconnections with mind,  
memory, brain, body, senses, and the observed and creatively  
manipulatable outer objective world.

In fact NO scientific theory can prove that that the brain  
"thinks" (and thus, is assumed to be conscious) nor is there any  
evidence that the information of consciousness is NOT (physically or  
chemically) electrodynamic in nature, and on the objective level, are  
NOT either photonic or electronic -- which, on the higher order  
hyperspace planes (ZPE fields in the Planck vacuum) are of an  
analogous, inductively resonant phonon nature that can be detectable,  
discriminatively, at maximum transmitted resolution, by zero-point  
consciousness.  Thus, the inner "light" we perceive in the mind,  
would necessarily be of a higher order (axionic-tachyonic- 
microleptonic) analog of the photonic light detected by the rods and  
cones of the retinas.

Best wishes,
LeonMaurer
>
> Kind Regards
> Robert Karl Stonjek
> 




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