Theos-Talk Archives (November 2009 Message tt00184)

On Sat Oct 24, 2009 10:07 pm ((PDT)) "Dhushara"  
chris@sexualparadox.org dhushara wrote:

>> (Leon) I wonder what makes you so certain that my ABC hypothesis  
>> is a so called "pseudo science"?
>
> It's because you are pulling a bunch of zero-point houdinis out of  
> the hat. They are non-verifiable, logically contradictory and they  
> are assumed to generate everything in sight.

Are you saying that the zero-point singularities at the center of the  
spin-momentum origin of ALL radiant energy fields, do not exist?  If  
so, point out the "logical contradictions" in my ABC model:
http://tinyurl.com/astrobiocoen.
>
> Also the holographic notion is used as another kind of geni which  
> it shouldn't because a hologram is simply an interference pattern  
> made with any form of coherent wave and as such it is really just a  
> simple application of Huygen's principle. (http://en.wikipedia.org/ 
> wiki/Huygens_principle)

Yes, that's old hat.  And, along with it, the holographic principle I  
follow (ref Bohm, pribram) is based on the fact that a hologram is an  
interference pattern recorded on a 2d surface that can be  
reconstructed by transmission or reflection of a coherent light  
radiation similar to the one that made it.

It's also a fact that ALL radiant EM fields (radio waves, etc.) can  
carry information as frequency or amplitude modulated (FM - AM)  
signals on their carrier waves or natural frequencies.

So , why couldn't the brain;s EM mind field along with its higher  
order (hyperspace) harmonically resonant memory fields (originating  
from the same zero-point) carry holographic information as modulated  
wave interference patterns on their carrier frequency (2d wave front)  
surfaces?

All that it takes to reconstruct (and perceive) such a visual image,  
would be the projection (and reflection) of a coherent radiation  
directly from the conscious zero-point singularity at the origin of  
the mind-memory fields... As simple as ABC -- because God doesn't  
need to play dice. ;-)  And each of us do have our own inner light --  
which can only be seen at the peak of samadhi meditation -- or after  
one's body dies

So, why couldn't that absolute zero-point be part of the BEC-like  
unconditioned absolute space -- which must exist prior to the initial  
cosmogenesis and manifestation of the initial fractal (harmonically)  
involved space-time electro-gravitational field matrix?

And, why wouldn't that initial cosmic singularity, prior to  
cosmogenesis, be the root of both phenomenal subjectivity and  
objectivity, or consciousness and matter -- "simultaneously arising",  
as the Buddha said?

> It's pseudo because you take an essentially well-founded scientific  
> concept and then evoke a mythopoetic description using the  
> scientific concepts as inflated tokens, with new powers of creative  
> projection not possessed in the scientific description.

What if the scientific description, is just that -- simply a non  
explanatory view of the suoperficial effects of the actions of the  
physical level EM fields and their material forms  -- that have no  
relationship to the actual causal reality?

IOW, why couldn't science be totally ignorant of the true nature of  
total absolute/relative space and time -- yet still be correct in its  
application to physical technology?

You have it ass backwards.  The ABC model comes first -- and then  
after breaking symmetry on the physical plane, we can begin to find  
the well founded scientific concepts (that the ABC theory exactly  
predicts right from the get go). All that science can do from here on  
out is verify it further.

Apparently, you are still trapped in your top down, spiritual  
materialism viewpoint, and can't see the forest for the trees... And,  
therefore can't stand it when a theory is presented that throws all  
your materialistically mathematized and direct observational  
conclusions into question.
>
> I think you have a reason for this based on your own personal  
> experiences of conscious existence but this is what all religious  
> thinkers do too.

You have no reason to assume anything about my personal experience or  
religious beliefs... And demean your own scientific credibility by  
making ad hominem conclusions or generalizations, and using them to  
discredit a scientifically philosophical theory that is based purely  
on mind experiments and logical reasoning, along with both scientific  
and engineering knowledge of how ALL visual and audio communication  
systems MUST work EVERYWHERE, on any dimensional (fractal harmonic)  
level of total spacetime.

FYI, my religious thinking is similar to Einstein's.

In addition, anyone can easily prove experimentally, that all  
transmitted or formative information is holistic in nature, and that  
the total spherical visible space-time is a hologram -- with all its  
information recorded in every zero-point of view within it. E.g.;  
Each one of us, no matter where we are located in space-time, view  
the total cosmos from its exact center.  Thus, explaining the  
original religious assumptions about the Earth being the center of  
the universe as it (like the sun and all the planets) appears to  
rotate around us.  Unfortunately, reductive science is still trapped  
in the assumption (belief) that matter is primary., and consciousness  
or subjectivity is an epiphenomena of the brain's neural processing.

You may see the fractals in every material thing, but you have no  
idea how it originated at the primal beginning out of the spiral  
vortex spin momentum of the cosmic singularity -- which is analogous  
to the singularity (ZPE) inside every photon spherical standing wave.
http://leonmaurer.info/ABCimages/PhotonField.gif
>



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