Theos-Talk Archives (November 2007 Message tt00030)

On Oct 21, 2007, at 10/21/0711:03 PM, RLG wrote:

> Hello all.
>
> A new study suggest that consciousness may be common to all, or  
> most, organisms with nervous systems.  A recent article in Science  
> News magazine, called "Consciousness in the Raw", by Bruce Bower,  
> suggests that the neural correlates of consciousness reside in the  
> brain stem.  If this is true then animals have consciousness and so  
> the ethics of how animals are treated takes on a new urgency.  This  
> week's edition of New scientist magazine (vol 196 No 2626) has an  
> article called "I am quantum, therefore I am", by Zeeya Merali.   
> The article discusses a new theory of quantum consciousness and,  
> unlike some theories of quantum consciousness; this new theory has  
> passed a series of experimental tests.  Most notably, it makes  
> specific predictions about the rates of conscious experiences that  
> can be, and have been, tested and the results are in agreement with  
> the theory.  Moreover, the new theory has convinced one physicist:  
> "Franco Nori, a quantum physicist at the University of Michigan,  
> Ann Arbor, who has in the past been sceptical of attempts to find a  
> quantum underpinning to consciousness, says Manousakis has made him  
> change his mind.  This is different, its logic is impeccable, he  
> says.  Nori is particularly impressed by the LSD results".  The  
> technical abstract is at the URL below but the New Scientist  
> article is best for a non-technical overview.
>
> http://www.arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0709/0709.4516v1.pdf

LM:
The problem with this paper -- besides the fact that it does not  
explain the primal cause or nature of the latent ground of  
consciousness prior to perception, or explain the actual (what it's  
like) experience of qualia (e.g., color, tone shape, etc)  -- is that  
it doesn't recognize that binocular rivalry may actually be based on  
the possibility that the mind, in whose field or *virtual space* the  
objective image is directly perceived by subjective consciousness,  
may be a radiant electromagnetic field that periodically comes in and  
out of existence at a frequency governed by the brain wave rhythms,  
and that the images in the field are *wave* interference patterns  
modulated on a higher order carrier wave frequency -- that are  
experienced as modulated phonons by an absolutely static quality of  
potential experiential consciousness that may be entirely independent  
of the neural processes or structures.

As a former motion picture and television engineer and expert on  
stereo vision systems, I am well educated (as a graduate chemical and  
electric engineer) in visual communication network systems, bio- 
electrochemical processes, and neuro-physiology.  Consequently, all  
my work in the acquisition, processing (analog, digital or hybrid),  
transmission, projection, and perception of stereo binocular images  
in full holographic (stereoscopic) depth perception, has been based  
on the principles of "binocular rivalry", "color constancy", and  
"stereoscopic depth" that assumes the field of mind is; (1) Radiantly  
electrodynamic in nature; (2) Sequentially alternates between left  
and right brain in phase with the predominant brain wave at the time  
of visual perception; (3) That color vision is based on relative  
adjacent and overall frequency comparisons, and that; (4) The mind  
field can carry only one complete visual image at each rise and  
fall.  This last, incidentally, accounts for the time perception of  
consciousness.

All that accounts for the ability to see full color when the eye  
detects two superimposed images consisting of only one high and one  
low frequency -- such as demonstrated in Edwin Land's retinex  
experiments, as well as experiments indicating the maintenance of  
color constancy under different overall lighting conditions or color  
adjacencies -- and also explains all optical illusions that oscillate  
between two different images which is also due to the complex  
arrangement of the crossover optic nerve network between left and  
right eyes and brain hemispheres.  In addition, these principles  
determine the ability to view by either one or both eyes, alternate  
stereo images projected sequentually at a particular fps rate, in  
full 3D depth perception (my Imagivision? method)  Thus, we have to  
conclude that visual and all other sensory perceptions depend solely  
on resonant electromagnetic fields generated by the brain and body's  
cellular structures, and NOT on any of the quantum effects of neural  
processing.

It's also obvious to me that the amount of assumptions made in the  
paper to justify their quantum mathematical conclusions, that  
actually do not explain anything about the real nature of visual  
perception or consciousness -- are entirely wrong... And, confirms  
Feynman's statement that, "Anyone who claims to understand quantum  
theory is either crazy or lying." :-)  Therefore, we have to assume  
that no  quantum equation can represent what is actually going on in  
the brain or body electrodynamically, nor can they explain any  
subjective phenomena.
>
>
> ---The Binding Problem---
>
> Due to the extreme difficulty of both the qualia problem, and the  
> hard problem, it seems prudent to first look at the binding  
> problem.  The binding problem arises because people believe that  
> existence is comprised of separate things.  But the idea that the  
> world is a collection of separate things is challenged by both  
> quantum theory and relativity.  From relativity we know that there  
> are no separate places and times along null geodesics.  Null  
> geodesics satisfy the equation (g_ik)*(dx^i)*(dx^k)=0 which means  
> they have no proper distance, and no proper time, in physical  
> spacetime.  A series of traveling photons, that all started their  
> journey from the same coordinate location in spacetime, all occupy  
> the same place and time (relative to themselves) throughout their  
> entire journey.  So it may be that the unity of conscious  
> experience results from all neural correlates of consciousness  
> occupying a common null geodesic.  Thus, within a given brain,  
> every neural correlate of consciousness is in direct contact with  
> all the others since there is no spatial, nor any temporal,  
> separation.  If this is true then it might be helpful in solving  
> both the qualia problem and the hard problem (although I am not  
> sure how).  Null geodesics also help to explain the strange  
> entanglement properties of the quantum world.  For instance EPR  
> effects can be explained, among all of the aforementioned traveling  
> photons, because they are in direct contact with each other at all  
> times throughout their journeys.
>
> However, there are still two types of binding: quantum entanglement  
> binding and the subjective binding of conscious experience.   
> Physics still has to be extended in order to relate these two  
> because the hard problem clearly shows the failure of material  
> stuff to deliver
> subjective stuff.  Clearly there are great discoveries yet to be  
> made here.

LM:
Here's one possibility... That considers both the null geodesic and  
the entanglement concepts.

If conscousness is assumed to be a fundamental qualitative aspect  
(potential awareness, will, qualia, etc.) of primal SPACE, located  
ubiquitously in the Planck vacuum at the zero-point center of origin  
(or "singularity') of the fractally involved ZPE fields (that  
generates and energizes all the fundamental particles) -- the  
"quantum entanglement" of those zero-point particle centers would  
necessarily be the efficient cause of the "binding of conscious  
experience."

Also, the associate ZPE fields surrounding each (and all) of those  
those zero-points of consciousness -- would logically be the medium  
of perceptive information, encoded as wave interference patterns on  
the surfaces of those fields... Their magnetically resonant nature  
would then account for both the assembly of fragmentally processed  
visual imagery in the brain, as well as the binding of both mind and  
memory to the brain -- since these sub quantum fields would be  
resonantly *entangled*, holographically, with all the local and  
global magnetic information fields surrounding every brain neuron and  
each discrete functional group of neurons, as well as every  
sensorially active body cell.

This entanglement of all fields of consciousness would also account  
for the local perception of a remote pain being felt simultaneously  
by global self reflective consciousness -- as well as explain the  
magnetically resonant holographic point for point coordination of the  
body fields (and their 3D mapping) with the perceived visual field,  
along with the similarly coordinated kinesthetic and visual  
processing of resonant EM information fields in the brain... All  
transformed to the higher order ZPE mind and memory fields that are  
actually perceived both locally and globally simultaneously... Thus,  
enabling a baseball player to catch a high fly on the run and jump, a  
sculptor to place the point of his tool on the precise point on the  
3D clay model that corresponds with the matching point on the  
holographic image of the subject perceived directly in his mind/ 
memory field, and a skillful and practiced musician to play a complex  
piano concerto from memory.

 From a physics and engineering standpoint, the 3D mental images  
cyclically refreshed in sequential motion (governed by alpha-beta- 
gamma rhythms) would be experienced at the apparent point of visual  
consciousness in the center of the brain, by detecting the modulated  
reflected phonons of the coherent energy radiation (covering the  
entire frequency spectrum of the mind field) willfully projected from  
the infinite spin momentum centers of ZPE fields (corresponding to  
each pixel of the original images on the retinas) that  
holographically reconstructs and merges the interference patterns of  
the combined stereo-binocular retinal images processed in the visual  
cortex.  (I can pictorially imagine this time sequential  
multidimensional process to its ultimate detail, but find it  
difficult to explain linguistically without reference to animated 3-D  
illustrations and flow diagrams.)   The 3-dimensional hardwired  
crossover optic nerve network between either one or both eyes, and  
the dual brain hemispheres, are also instrumental in this process of  
stereo-binocular vision -- (which even further complicates the  
explanation problem from a multidimensional coenergetic field network  
or optical-electrical engineering POV).

This simple coenergetic field concept -- which, incidentally, at both  
its metaphysical and physical level, is closely in conformance with  
Einstein's General Relativity, Maxwell-Ampere-Faraday's energy  
equations, and the "holographic paradigm" theories of Bohm-Pribram et  
al, as well as with leading edge string, LQG, axion, tachyon,  
microlepton, aether, cosmological, etc., theories (all of which are  
as yet incomplete since they don't recognize consciousness as the  
*only* creative force in nature, or that all physical processes are  
fundamentally electrodynamic, and rooted in spin-momentum and ZPE  
fields) -- seems to me to be far more explanatory and parsimonious  
than any complex theories of consciousness (quantum or otherwise)  
based on perception being an epiphenomena of the brain's neural  
processing or physical structure.  Such a unified field theory of  
consciousness also completely eliminates the hard problem -- since  
the "experience of consciousness" occurs in primal SPACE that is  
outside the realm of physical or metaphysical description.

The only difference, with relation to basic physics, would be a  
change of its paradigm to include the fundamental separation between  
consciousness and matter (i.e., subjectivity and objectivity) as well  
as accept their meta-or supra-physical and physical field  
interconnection on the *informational* level, and to recognize that  
the source of all matter is the spin-momentum force of the ubiquitous  
and entangled zero-point "singularity" of that Absolute primal SPACE  
-- whose dual nature of potential consciousness and matter would  
become the fundamental a priori basis of all theories of physical or  
spatial dynamics -- which would have to consider both subjective and  
objective evidence as being equally valid, while eliminating or  
modifying the empirical basis of falsification.

The simplest way I've found to logically explain the initial  
involution and evolution of the necessarily fractal involved fields  
of consciousness and matter, and their electrodynamic and holographic  
interrelationships, would be through symbolic 3D topological and  
geometric field illustrations such as these:  Meditate on them, and  
you might better comprehend what I am talking about.

http://members.aol.com/leonmaurer/Chakrafield-spherical-col_3.jpg
http://users.aol.com/leonmaurer/Fract-Exp-Lt-Dk-matter-text.png
http://users.aol.com/leonmaurer/Chakrafielddiag-fig.col.jpg

Hopefully, some open minded and imaginative physicists might be able  
to work out the electrodynamics and descriptive topological  
geometries, and find an experimental proof that would verify this  
general hypothesis that could very well underly a final unified field  
theory of everything.  I would be happy to see one or more of them  
win a Nobel prize in physics, chemistry and physiology before I check  
out with the ghost in the machine. :-)

Best wishes,

Leon Maurer

>
> R
>
>
>


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