Theos-Talk Archives (April 2009 Message tt00348)

Comment on a conversation related to cosmogenesis, consciousness and  
space that could be of interest to thinking theosophists who would  
rather work on spreading theosophy to the world than arguing about  
its organizations and their leaders who are already dying or dead. ;-)

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Gregory Nixon <doknyx@shaw.ca>
> Date: April 22, 2009 11:04:49 AM EDT
> To: Leon Maurer <leonmaurer@aol.com>
> Subject: Re: [jcs-online] Living ideas
>
> Wow. Sincerely: wow. Nobody but nobody can knock off grand,  
> unsettling, wonderful ideas like you, Leon.
>
> Always merry & bright,
> Nixon
>
> On Apr 17, 2009, at 6:23 PM, Leon Maurer wrote:
>>
>> Of course, when one believes that the only reality is what can be
>> directly experienced by the senses, measured, picked up, touched,
>> tasted, seen, etc., or that can be implied indirectly by its effects
>> on objects, such as invisible magnetic fields... And cannot imagine
>> the field of mind existing in a different dimension or frequency
>> phase order of "overall" (eternal empty) space -- that can only be
>> experienced by the images it carries -- which are visible only to our
>> equally invisible and unmeasurable consciousness (subjective
>> awareness) ... There is not much point in trying to explain the
>> nature of fundamental empty space (as the stationary locale of
>> consciousness) that underlies all the experienced (and invisible)
>> objects and fields in metric (directionally measurable) spacetime --
>> to such a pre conditioned hard head living in Plato's cave. ;-) Is
>> it any wonder then, why -- when one of those people hear about
>> something that might contradict their fixed beliefs -- they blank
>> out and doze off?
>>
>> Unfortunately -- (for such a closed minded materialist caught up in
>> 20th century physical materialist science as the end all to explain
>> everything) -- the universe and every field and form ini it DOES
>> originate from and rest on its infinite zero-points of timeless and
>> dimensionless (thus "empty" and "eternal") absolute or "ground
>> space... That, at each zero-point (acting contiguously with all other
>> zero points, as one thing, like a BEC) contains the total potential
>> mass energy of the entire cosmos... Apparently, in the form of
>> infinite angular spin momentum of every zero-point of it (that
>> requires no measurable physical diameter).
>>
>> Incidentally, this underlying unity of everything -- with all the
>> energy and structural information of the entire cosmos contained in
>> every zero-point -- could be the fundamental basis of the holographic
>> paradigm postulated by Bohm and Pribram.
>>
>> Obviously, neither the objective universe nor its subjective
>> consciousness can possibly arise out of nothing. And, if the
>> universe is a hologram, all its information accessible to
>> consciousness would have to be be carried as wave interference
>> patterns on radiant harmonic (fractal involved) energy fields,
>> between near zero and near infinite frequency phase orders, and
>> transmitted from field to fields by some sort of phase conjugate
>> adaptive resonance process, and detected by consciousness by
>> reflecrtion of a coherent energy willfully radiated
>>
>> So, apparently, that "empty" absolute space (located at the zero-
>> point origin of every particle and radiant field) -- must be as
>> substantial and potentially mass-energetic as the entire metric
>> spacetime universe that arises out of it.
>>
>> And, since consciousness (awareness, will, qualia, etc) must be
>> absolutely stationary relative to the 3d holographic vibrational
>> images it discriminatively perceives, and also acts as a fixed
>> locational reference point for locating the 3-d coordinate position
>> of any sensory image source and, both visually and sonically
>> coordinating the body fields with the 3-d outer world image field...
>> That absolute (0°K) zero-point space (located everywhere in the
>> Planck vacuum between and at the center of all particle standing wave
>> fields) is the only place consciousness could be located -- as a
>> fundamental property of that absolute space itself..
>>
>> In essence, that means consciousness is located everywhere in the
>> universe at the center of origin of every radiant energy field and
>> fundamental particle. As this is mind experimentally obvious -- it
>> requires no blind belief in a god-creator, or material
>> epiphenomena... And with respect to consciousness study, simply
>> resolves and explains all the "hard problems" of qualia, brain-mind
>> binding, non locality, psi phenomena, etc.
>>
>> Therefore, you can either believe that the ABC model is true, or
>> not... But, nevertheless, its fractal involved harmonic
>> electrodynamic fields (initiated at the moment of cosmogenesis) is
>> solidly based on those fundamental realities and logical imperatives
>> (in addition to being entirely governed everywhere by the inherent
>> laws of fractal geometry, frequency-energy, thermodynamics, and
>> electrodynamics... All rooted in the infinite cyclic spin momentum
>> at each zero-point of absolute space, located everywhere.
>>
>> With the advances made in physical science and technology over the
>> past 20-50 years, how can anyone deny the existence of ZPE or the ZPE
>> fields that generate and empower all the fundamental quantum
>> particles? And, why isn't it perfectly obvious that, if the universe
>> is a fractal involved, elecrodynamic field hologram, it can can
>> answer all the unexplained questions of science and resolve all its
>> paradoxes and anomalies?
>>
>> Thus, the first conscious hyperspherical energy field radiated from
>> that cosmic zero-point singularity must have a frequency and light
>> speed velocity close to infinite. This would be what the Eastern
>> philosophers wold call the "Supreme Spirit", of which each human
>> spirit is an analogous reflection of in our 4th lower order physical
>> spacetime. See:
>> http://leonmaurer.info/ABCimages/Chakrafield-spherical-col_3.jpg
>> http://leonmaurer.info/ABCimages/Cyclic-paths-cosmogenesis.jpg
>>
>> So, this concept is as alive as all the sentient beings in the
>> universe capable of experiencing their individual consciousness (that
>> must be contiguous with the universal consciousness) located at the
>> center of their physical forms and all their living parts (cells,
>> organs, etc,). But to understand it, one must have advanced to the
>> level of a human being, whose mind is unconditioned by beliefs in a
>> limited physical realty, and entirely open to the infinite
>> possibilities in an eternal reality that has no beginning or ending,
>> is infinitely flexible, compressible and expandable, and is governed
>> throughout, when manifest into infinite fractally involved universes,
>> by the immutable laws of cycles and periodicity inherent in its
>> abstract motion of pure spin momentum.
>>
>> So, all the ABC model can do is illustrate and explain symbolically
>> how these fractal fields multidimensionally involve and ultimately
>> evolve into our present physical/material universe -- where modern
>> physics and cosmology can take over its descriptions and explain its
>> dynamics and mechanics.
>>
>> As for the practicality of the ABC explanation of consciousness and
>> how it works... That's up to each individual thinker who can
>> understand the fundamental unity of all, recognize the justice of
>> karma (action=reaction) along with the power of conscious mind over
>> matter, and join in to utilize the creative ability of commonly
>> directed and focussed conscious minds, to reform and recreate this
>> rapidly deteriorating world around us, that we all can see is heading
>> for a catastrophic collapse -- based on separateness, selfishness and
>> greed... Which must end -- if the world is to ever hope to eventually
>> become a paradise that we all could enjoy in relative peace and
>> prosperity.
>>
>> What more practical application for the ABC ideas of consciousness
>> can there be? Isn't saving the world -- by all of us acting together
>> with the same knowledge of fundamental reality and the power of
>> focussed minds -- enough?
>>
>> So, instead of dozing off because anyone can't follow the reasoning
>> or doesn't want to hear anything that might change their mind -- all
>> that they have to do (if they can't follow the reasoning behind what
>> I'm talking about) is ask questions... With the realization that the
>> only thing that distinguishes intelligent "living" beings from
>> anything else, is the ability to experience and express consciousness
>> (awareness, will, qualia, etc.) and, in some cases, explain where it
>> comes from, how it works, and how it all began. ;-)
>>
>> Best wishes,
>> Leon Maurer
>> http://canonizer.com/topic.asp/88/4
>>
>> On Apr 8, 2009, at 4/8/0911:36 AM, donald_morisson wrote:
>>
>> Leon is proposing that we believe his ABC model.
>>
>> 'Ion: (responding to Socrates) When anyone discusses any other poet,
>> I pay no attention, and can offer no remark of any value. I frankly
>> doze. But whenever anyone mentions Homer, immediately I am awake,
>> attentive, and full of things to say.' (Ion, 532c1-4)
>>
>> The concept of dead and living ideas has a long history. It may be
>> that, upon reading my quote of Plato, your eyes start to glaze over
>> and you doze. That would result in the complete failure of my quote
>> to achieve the goals I used it for. If I asked you to believe in the
>> Mahdi, it is unlikely the signal would activate any of your
>> receptors, it would create no spark, no scintillations within your
>> brain, DOA. As a concept, 'Mahdi' is likely to be as completely dead
>> to you as it is to me. To an Arab, living in the 1860's, however, the
>> concept is among the mind's possibilities. It is alive. An idea's
>> viability is not an intrinsic property, but a relation to the
>> individual reader. The viability of an idea is measured by the
>> willingness of the reader to act. If a model has life within the
>> reader the reader is prepared to act, and will have at least a
>> tendency to believe the model.
>>
>> Your idea of 'space', for example, by your description of it as 'the
>> underlying, eternal, unconditioned absolute (0degreeK) space--whose
>> spin-momentum singularities etc.', is DOA. It makes no connection to
>> the space I am comfortable in. Why even call it space if it is not,
>> as you say, the real space? I mean, who talks like that today,
>> 'underlying', 'eternal', 'unconditioned'? How are they components of
>> the same language that uses 'singularities'? I doubt many on this
>> forum are practicing cosmologists (if that is even the framework
>> within which you attempt to communicate).
>>
>> Perhaps you can breathe some new life into your ideas. Try to rename
>> them, upgrade the 'decor'. Would it be possible for you to
>> reformulate your model in the context of consciousness studies and
>> the 21st century? So, for example, you should be able to define
>> 'consciousness'in such a way that most can connect with what you are
>> taliking about. Can you say how would one use your ideas about
>> consciousness? Do they have any practical application?
>>
>> Leon,
>> What is this "spatial distance" characteristic that you refer to?
>> Are you still saying that space and not field is fundamental?
>>
>> Yes. But the "space" I'm referring to as fundamental, is not the
>> physical-metaphysical "spacetime" that are simply gravitational
>> fields of various frequency-energy phase orders... But, it is the
>> underlying, eternal, unconditioned absolute (0°K) space -- whose  
>> spin-
>> momentum singularities are the root of all spacetime (matter-energy)
>> fields. Thus, the singularities of the aether space are not
>> fundamental, nor are the subsequent fields of configuration spacetime
>> generated from them. IOW, there is an eternal, unconditioned, pure
>> (absolute) space, that underlies all conditioned spacetime fields --
>> starting with the initial, near infinite frequency-energy field of
>> cosmic hyperspacetime. So pure unconditioned "space" and spacetime
>> "fields" are two different, yet interdependent aspects of overall
>> reality
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>
> =


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