Theos-Talk Archives (January 2010 Message tt00015)

Jack (aka Ralph),

There's no point in arguing about whether my or your theory of  
consciousness is correct... But, so far you haven't given one  
argument that disproves or contradicts my ABC model -- which actually  
explains where consciousness comes from and how it is directly  
effected by the information of consciousness, along with how that  
information is carried or stored in mind and memory fields, and  
transmitted to the conscious perceiver/responder ? which has to be of  
a different (subjective) aspect of overall space than either the  
perception (experience of qualia) and the objects of perception (the  
inner image information and/or the outer world objets).

IOW, subjective consciousness (awareness, will, qualia, etc.) cannot  
be part of any objective material substance or their structural  
conditions or processes. The only thing "tactile" about its  
experience would be that it *feels* the modulated wave patterns of  
sensory images information as differing pressure waves or phonons.   
This also means that, as the discriminator (to use a radio term) it  
must act as a "black body" and be absolutely motionless, relative to  
the vibrating wave patterns of the modulated information carried by  
the higher f/E order radiant energy field surrounding it.  This is  
basic physics 101,

The only thing that could be so relatively static, is the zero-point  
of absolute space at the center of the spin momentum (aether) origin  
of all ZP energy fields (and their vibrating particle-standing waves)  
along with all other compound electrodynamic forms, from quantum  
particles, through atoms and molecules, to brain-bodies, etc.).  IOW,  
the zero=point of consciousness is located everywhere, and accounts  
for the conscious experience of pain in a finger, smell in the nose,  
touch on the skin, taste on the tongue, sight and hearing in the  
center of the head, etc., etc.  These sensations are experienced as  
belonging to our individual body because each zero-point of cellular  
consciousness in the body is entangled with the center of individual  
(I am) consciousness located in the Naval chakra at the center of the  
individual's initial triune monadic field (soul) surrounding the  
entire body. See:
http://leonmaurer.info/ABCimages/Chakrafield-spherical-col_3.jpg   
This fixed self reference point enables us to locate the exact 3D  
coordinates of the sensation in the body by an analog triangulation  
process similar to the GPS system, along with the resonance coupling  
between the body image field and the fields surrounding the point of  
conscious perception... Also basic physics 101.

If you believe that man has an eternal soul ? which I assume is  
consistent with your religious faith ? then this analogous triune  
monadic "soul" field structure and their fractal harmonic inner  
fields of both total cosmic spacetime (as the body of God) and man's  
total seven fold spiritual, mental, astral, and material body nature  
should be perfectly obvious... Thus, it holds that "As above, so  
below", and  "The macrocosm is the mirror of the microcosm" ? as all  
the ancient masters of wisdom from Hermes, through Pythagorus and  
Plato  to Origen said.

So far. your ordered water theory dances around making vague  
inferences ? without ever describing the actual mechanisms of  
consciousness that allows us to see a rose in full color and  
exquisite detail as a direct interpretation of the vibrating energy  
rays reflected from it.  This reflected holographic  image of the  
"object of perception" is processed in the brain and transformed into  
correspondingly modulated frequency vibrations that can only be  
discriminated, differentiated, integrated, and interpreted by a  
stationary reference point of subjective awareness located at a  
singular point of view that is also capable of releasing. from its  
surrounding ZPE spin momentum, the coherent radiation capable of  
reconstructing and reflecting the holographic image of the Rose  
carried as wave interference patterns in the mind field.  This is  
physics 201.

Thus, it's obvious that this conscious zero-point of absolute space  
could only be located at the center of origin of the energy field  
that carries the frequency modulated inner light image we actually  
see -- which is exactly analogous to the outer light image reflected  
from the object of perception -- since it appears to be as if was  
projected from our singular POV out to the object itself.  This  
interconnection of all energy radiation and information between zero  
and infinity is the basis of the holographic principle <http:// 
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holographic_principle>  This is physics 301

This reflected objective image is composed of individual photons  
radiated from every point on the object -- which all converge at  
every zero-point of space between the eye and the object. This is so  
obvious as to require no explanation... Although, it can be easily  
demonstrated experimentally... Thus. proving that the overall  
spacetime universe is a hologram... e,g,; As Bohm pointed out, if we  
remove the lens of the eye, all we could see is a hologram.  This is  
also why a pinhole camera records the entire objective image on its  
film surface. And, also why, no matter where we move our point of  
view we always see the exact same object in all its detail (only from  
a different angle,) and can easily judge its distance and motion in  
relation to all other stationary or moving objects in the overall  
scene ? either by stereo-optic (binocular) depth perception, and/or  
by relative size and perspective -- which, when using one eye,  
coupled with slight lateral movements, simulate stereo-vision.

To comprehend this fully, one has to understand that the holograph  
isn't the actual perception, but is the actual object of perception  
of which we only see its hologram converted to the flat images on the  
retinas -- which are stereo-optically merged into an appearance of 3D  
depth only when both eyes are opened.  The 3D interference patterned  
hologram in the inner visual field is caused by the different angles  
of view of each eye and the different convergence of the eyes at  
different distances.  If you can see 3D films in a movie theater  
(using polaroid glasses) and perceive the depth of the images, this  
will become completely obvious ? as a simple expression of projective  
spherical geometry.  The crossover network of optical nerves in both  
left and right brain from each eye, also plays a role in this stereo- 
optic or binocular fusion.

That could only be possible if the conscious point of view and the  
visual objective scene were both part of the same radiant field --  
with awareness (and judgement, as well as willful intent) at its  
center and the image hologram on its spherical surfaces.  And that  
zero-point of consciousness , then, would have to be at the static  
center of the spin momentum source of the radiation -- which can only  
be unconditioned absolute space itself ? which is the source and  
ground of all radiant spacetime electro-gravitational fields.

The brain then is only a holonomic transducer (as Pribram pointed  
out) that, after the eye lens converts the holograms on its surface  
to a 2D image on the retina, transforms the electro-chemical signals  
(from the sensory receptors) and assembles them back into its  
electromagnetic field's 2D surface ? as a wave interference patterned  
hologram.  This hologram is then transformed by phase conjugate  
adaptive resonance to the higher f/E order subquantum hyperspace  
field (where quarks are the fundamental particles) and where the  
frequency-mass-energy (light) level is at least vibrating and moving  
at c^2.

Since everything (i.e., total objective reality) staring from the  
first instant of cosmogenesis is composed of LIGHT ? which is  
fundamentally the vibration of primal space between zero and infinite  
Hz (radiating from every zero-point in spacetime)  ? light must also  
be the basis of all mechanisms of consciousness, mind, memory, brain,  
body, senses, etc.

So, with that simplicity, what need is there for all the complexity  
of material structural dualities, and ordered water being fundamental  
as the link between objectivity and subjectivity?  In fact, it even  
becomes obvious that the DNA molecule itself, transfers all its  
information for the construction of proteins by electrodynamic field  
resonance processes... And that the information telling it where to  
place the individual proteins in the body cells, is guided by he  
holographic electrodynamic body image carried on the higher order ZPE  
fields in the hyperspace realm ? located everywhere in the sub- 
quantum Planck false vacuum.

This is so simple and direct, as well as consistent with all the  
cutting edges of new physics (which consolidates all the old physics  
theories  that could never explain any of the hard problems of  
consciousness)... That I can't imagine how even a separate God could  
have used any more complex process in creating the universe and  
everything in it... While still allowing evolution (through morphic  
fields, containing infinite information from a previous cycle of  
manifestation) to guide the development of all sentient nature...  
Until mankind could appear in its own image (i.e., the microcosm that  
is the mirror of the macrocosm).

Aren't mankind's bodies just as or even more complex (in its total  
material structure, including their collective brains) than the  
entire visible universe?  Can you visualize all the infinite galaxies  
and stars, and all their interconnecting electro-gravitational fields  
as an immense interconnected neural structure or cosmic brain-body,  
that is analogous to the collective human brain-body systems?  If so,  
how can we separate that conscious God from any of its similarly  
conscious creatures (but with lesser and lesser experience and  
knowledge or intelligence/wisdom)?

Therefore, like Einstein ? who knew all this but couldn't fit it into  
the "physics" he sold his soul to (until he quit) ? I like to  
consider this entire ubiquitously conscious (and omnipresent,  
omniscient and omnipotent) cosmos, as God (who "doesn't play dice")

No faith required ? just plain common sense, intuitive imagination,  
and logical reasoning based on fundamental principles coupled with  
pure scientific thinking or mind experiments.   You (and all the  
others in this forum) should try it sometime. ;-)

So, put on your thinking cap, open your mind and imagination, and  
ponder on those apples.
(Just remember that everything starts from zero and goes to infinity,  
consciousness is NOT matter-energy, and there are no explanatory gaps  
in between.)

Best wishes,
Leon Maurer
http://tinyurl.com/astrobiocoen


On Jan 3, 2010, at 1/3/102:10 PM, Ralph wrote:

> Leon,
>
> Overall, and this is probably a difficult or impossible pill for  
> you to swallow, if you notice you say you start with assumption of  
> a purely logical correct cosmogenesis story and then that ends up  
> (via the rigid, static immovable absolute space plus waves  
> plus ...) to get taste on the tongue and visual field in the center  
> of the head, etc., and then guys like Serge and I come along and  
> say, "well, yeah, maybe there are bits of truth in the way you  
> structure duality and employ the holographic metaphor, but your  
> entire ball of ceiling wax doesn't add up and jibe with reality".   
> That is, your trial theory, minimally, needs several substantial  
> readjustments.
>
> I can relate to the sense that there is an "origin" of a map in or  
> near the "center of my head",  but I was trained in surveying and  
> engineering  long ago and my spatial memory is pretty good.   
> However, other people in my family and others I've known, have what  
> I would call an unbelievably terrible sense of direction.  That is,  
> their spatial memory sense is developed differently in them.  I  
> suggest that your spatial or referential memory may be geared in a  
> remarkable way that gives you impressions or feelings that are  
> absolutes -- for you, but not for the gp (general population) or  
> for the entire universe.
>
> Secondly, as I have related before, my adaptations to low vision  
> this past year (resulting from surgical posterior ischemic optic  
> neuropathy - I may change my name to One-eyed Jack) all that has  
> reaffirmed that our haptics and sense of touch really is the basis  
> for whatever "center or head" visual field collision avoidance  
> routines we develop.  Those haptics also include range finding with  
> regular or more-attended-to sense of hearing.
>
> However,  where you seem to suggest that seeing with one-eye shifts  
> one from a 3D to 2D experience, or make similar extrapolations as  
> part of your string of rationalization that "the ABC theory must be  
> correct",   what is turning out to be the case is the statements  
> you are making are not factually correct which means that your  
> trial theory is not holding up under the load, is falsified.
>
> My experience with not seeing out of my left eye and losing  
> peripheral vision in the right is I don't see things to the left  
> without turn my head.  But the world has not gone "flat".
>
> In addition, as for the non-holographic logic of experiencing taste  
> on the tongue, dropping into even mildly nested structural coding,  
> taste receptors are appropriately positioned right around the  
> protein folding that is most helpful in the gag reflex to limit  
> intake of off-spec metabolites.   Similarly, for the structural  
> coding receptors in the  oxygen intake/pre-heater ports.
>
> Hydrogen sulfide, the smell of rotten eggs, for instance, like  
> hydrogen cyanide, binds with the iron in hemoglobin and is fatal to  
> humans in moderately low concentrations.  Positioning the receptors  
> on the intake end is a decent bit of intelligent structural coding.  
> I mean, we call it intelligent, or it is the type of thing we would  
> or should copy or emulate in our systems.
>
> Now,  where I am coming from in pointing out that prior to the  
> flashy displays sparking in the neural connections, we are ALL  
> running an intensely  delicate 6^n analog math system in the 10^20  
> unit per second structural coding that is forming in our  cellular  
> respiration sites. This internal analog math system, by physics  
> alone, provides a persistent and slowly changing internal  
> reflection of what's going on in the local regions.   But better,  
> even than sliced bread,  here all the structural coding is  
> scribbled out  in active hydrogen-bonded packets and sheets that  
> couple nicely with conformation shifts and protein folding,   
> "building up pressures", so to speak, providing the "will",  
> activating channels of common attention.
>
> And, on on hand, sure, this is all got a deeply convoluted quantum  
> mechanical description, or a description that can be cast in  
> quantum mechanical or quantum gravitational terms, or said to be  
> various scribbles of electromagnetic field segments (which  
> "collapse" into shifting conformations or various protein  
> foldings.  Or, for instance, it supports the articulation of, and  
> has features of akin to the holographic  imagery.
>
> But, it's still helpful and accurate to just focus in on the  
> packets of active hydrogen bonding being formed and providing  
> immediately useful adaptive, dissipative structural coding.  I  
> mean, we can make it more complicated, but what's the sense?
>
> Pointing off into the idealized distance, toward one or the other  
> of the various Emerald Cities, to get a different description cast  
> in a different set of non-analog math symbols, sure, doable and  
> probably helpful,  but all of those descriptions still need to  
> "pass through the swamp" to be  BE expressions.
>
> So the internal analog language scribbled in ordered water  is a  
> simplified (yet, accurate) translation of quantum mechanics, aka,  
> matrix mechanics, aka, quantum consciousness, but with the  
> advantage that we can visualize various aspects of the formation,  
> storage, retrieval and expressive interactions through the lens of  
> structural coding.  So, while Stapp or others may point toward the  
> abstract quantum mechanical or cascading quantum gravitational wave  
> function collapse, in the 6^n ordered water structural coding, we  
> have the real thing.
>
> Think about it.
>
> Best regards,
> "Jack"
>
>
>
> --- In jcs-online@yahoogroups.com, Leon Maurer <leonmaurer@...> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Mar 19, 2008, at 3/19/0811:37 PM, Serge Patlavskiy wrote:
>>
>>>   [S.P.] Maybe, the reason why I cannot understand the ABC model
>>> of  cosmogenesis is that I do not think there are such things as
>>> "holographic information", "visual consciousness", "objective
>>> information", "informational waves", "sensory information", etc. I
>>> accept that the mind deals always with cumulative sensory input. If
>>> to  accept this assertion is true, then we can easily explain the
>>> fact of  exacerbation of hearing.
>>
>> LM: Aren't the interference patterns recorded on a hologram, the
>> "information" used to create the holograph -- like the information on
>> a blueprint is used to create the structure?  Isn't that information
>> just as objective as the holograph or the hologram it derives from?
>> Isn't the information of the holograph on the hologram recorded from
>> the wave interference patterns in the light radiation projected onto
>> it?  Is not those light modulations also information?  Why can't the
>> light image we consciously experience in the mind's eye ? located in
>> the center of our head (in contrast to the smell we consciously
>> experience in the nose, taste on the tongue, or touch on the skin) ?
>> be distinguished as "visual consciousness" or visual awareness, as
>> contrasted with out "taste, "smell, and "touch
>> consciousness" ("Consciousness" being equated with "awareness")?
>>
>> Please explain what "exacerbation of hearing while the visual sensory
>> organs are impaired or absent" means?
>>
>> Although I agree that the mind can only hold one thought or sensory
>> impression at any given instant of time -- since the entire field is
>> occupied by whatever sense our attention is directed to at any
>> particular instant.
>>
>>>   Second, I cannot understand what makes us to define conscious
>>> experience as a projection "from a single point as a holistic
>>> matrix of  modulated point sourced qualia inside the objective
>>> spherical world  field". For me, a conscious experience -- it is
>>> just a set of the  elements of knowledge which we receive in the
>>> result of  conceptualisation of the processed physical sensory
>>> signals. The mind  uses the available elements of knowledge during
>>> processing the new  sensory signals. The informational models aim
>>> to help us to understand  how the knowledge (or experience) is
>>> being amassed. That's all. While  we regard informational models,
>>> we are not interested how those  elements of knowledge are
>>> physically recorded. I may readily maintain  the view that the
>>> ordered water plays a crucial role in storing  information (I treat
>>> the ordered water as a simplest self-organising  complex system),
>>> but we should not mingle together the informational  and physical
>>> models.
>>
>> LM: Why not?  Isn't the information of consciousness carried in the
>> mind and memory fields intermediate between the brain processing and
>> the experience of consciousness, or the willful intent or response to
>> the thought or sensory experience?  Would there be any conscious
>> experience, such as the single pointed view of the holographic visual
>> field, if there were no hologram (wave interference pattern) in the
>> mind or memory fields?  As for the ordered water... There is no
>> evidence that such material can carry and transmit the holographic
>> signals necessary for subjective experience of the vision sense.  Nor
>> is there any evidence that the the brain and mind are identical, or
>> that consciousness (awareness, will, qualia, etc,) is an epiphenomena
>> of the neurology or its processes.  In my view, consciousness and
>> matter are two different fundamental aspects of unconditioned
>> absolute  space.
>>>   .
>>>   Third. Why we have to think that what we have in our mind is
>>> always a  "3D holographic picture"? I am a human as well, but I can
>>> easily  imagine a straight line in an empty space, a 2D image, a 3D
>>> image (I  can easily rotate a cube in my mind), and a 3D
>>> holographic image. In  principle, I can reproduce everything that
>>> can be seen, heard, touched,  smelt, etc. in real, and even much
>>> more. I can even imagine myself as  if being in other person's
>>> "skin", and to see the world "through the  eyes" of the other
>>> person. If I have a lack of information before doing  something, I
>>> can imagine a situation where I play a certain role, and  can
>>> imagine the other persons who play their roles too. Everything
>>> depends on my desire, but not on the immanent property of some
>>> specific  "holographic information".
>>
>> LM:  When only one eye is open the picture in the mind is a two
>> dimensional image of a three dimensional space.  However the image
>> must still be carried as a wave interference patterned hologram on
>> the EM carrier field in order to be detected by the coherent energy
>> radiated ( and reflected from the reconstructed holograph) from the
>> spin momentum source of the mind field, whose static center of
>> absolute space is pure consciousness or perceptive awareness and
>> willful intent.
>>
>> This mechanism of conscious perception is based on the proposition
>> that our consciousness (awareness, will) is a fundamental quality of
>> unconditioned absolute zero-point space, and that the spacetime
>> universe originates from a zero-point singularity of infinite spin
>> momentum that initially radiates a nested series of fractal involved
>> EM fields ranging in frequency from near infinite to near zero on the
>> lower order [physical plane, after stepping down from the highest
>> frequency energy phase order spiritual level, through the mental and
>> astral planes.  Naturally, this proposition, while consistent with
>> the original GRT theory, completely disagrees with the standard
>> (Copenhagen) model of quantum physics ? based on both fundamental
>> principles originating in unconditioned absolute space, and the
>> following facts:
>>
>> 1.  Every zero-point of conscious observation is at the exact center
>> of the spherical visual field of the total physical universe.
>> 2.  All information radiating from any point in spherical spacetime
>> converges at every point of observation between any observer and the
>> total field observed.
>> 3.  All fundamental particles are spherical standing waves of radiant
>> electromagnetic fields in total spacetime. (ref; Milo Wolff)
>> 4.  All such spherical radiant fields (and their fractal harmonics)
>> originate from a singularity (zero-point) of infinite spin momentum
>> in unconditioned absolute space ? located everywhere in conditioned
>> spacetime.
>> 5.  All structural information is contained in the spin momentum
>> source of each such particle's spherical standing waveform ? which us
>> analogous to the initial standing waveform field of the total super-
>> spacetime arising out of the cosmic singularity, and also to the 4th
>> lowest order physical spacetime arising out of its singularity at the
>> first instant of the so called "big bang inflation".
>> 6.  All such structural information is in the form of a hologram
>> carried as wave interference patterns on the surface of radiant EM
>> energy fields, and transformed from the initial cosmic field through
>> the descending orders of fractal involved harmonic fields, by phase
>> conjugate adaptive resonance.
>> 7.  Any EM field originating from a zero-point singularity of
>> absolute space, can vibrate at any frequency between zero and
>> infinity during initial cosmic inflation and prior to breaking of
>> symmetry on the lowest order physical spacerime.
>> 8.  All radiant EM fields in unconditioned (timeless and
>> dimensionless) absolute space can have infinite fractal involved
>> harmonics,
>> 9.  Pure observer consciousness (unconditioned awareness) to be able
>> to differentiate between the subtlest modulations of information
>> carried on radiant fields surrounding it, must be entirely stationary
>> relative to the natural frequency vibrations of the field.
>> 10. Therefore, pure observer consciousness, as the detector/
>> discriminator of both time and motion on any frequency phase order
>> between zero and infinity ? must be a fundamental subjective quality
>> of the zero-point-instant of absolute space located everywhere in
>> manifest hyperspherical spacetime====== infinite fractal involved
>> holonomic plenum.
>>>  .
>>>   Information is not an objective entity, and has no objective (or
>>> mind-independent) characteristics. As I have pointed above, there
>>> are  no such things as "objective information" or "sensory
>>> information".  What we have is merely a physical sensory signal
>>> that after processing  and conceptualization may be transformed
>>> into information by the  subject of cognitive activity. So,
>>> information has a purely subjective  character -- it exists as an
>>> element of knowledge only for the given  conscious subject. It is
>>> not the eye that sees, but the conscious  subject. The eye only
>>> looks at something and converts the optical  signal into sensory
>>> signal (at that, both signals are physical), but  the conscious
>>> subject decides whether to conceptualize that sensory  signal as a
>>> "tree", a "house", or as something else, or just to ignore  that
>>> sensory signal. (That is why we sometimes are looking at
>>> something, but seeing nothing).
>>
>> LM:  Since I consider information as the encoded signals carried by
>> radiant electromagnetic fields, or stored as encoded molecular
>> structures such as in the DNA molecule (which are nothing mire than
>> stable combinations of electromagnetic fields down to their
>> fundamental quantum particles) ? and you consider information as
>> being the actual experience or knowledge of a conscious subject ?
>> there can be no agreement between us.  Naturally, I agree that it's
>> not the eye that sees.  but, it is the eye that collects the
>> holographic information that the brain processes and transforms into
>> an encoded form (wave interference pattern) carried by a radiant
>> field ? that the one pointed consciousness can detect, reconstruct
>> and perceive as a real image in the mind.  The conscious subject
>> itself has no choice in the actual condition of the image seen --
>> since the tree is always seen as a tree regardless of whether the
>> conscious thinker calls it a horse or a house, or ignores it
>> altogether.  Apparently, you are mixing up the actual experience of
>> consciousness with the interpretation of or thoughts about that
>> experience.
>>>   .
>>>   Now then, there are two possible ways in which the problem of
>>> transformation of physical sensory signal into subjective
>>> experience  can be solved. In a general case, the solution to the
>>> "hard problem" is  in unification of the explanatory frameworks
>>> used to formalize the  physical world and consciousness
>>> correspondingly. So, the first way is  in describing consciousness
>>> in physical terms, and in explaining its  mechanisms through the
>>> physical processes. The second way is in  describing the physical
>>> world in informational terms, and in explaining  the physical
>>> processes through the interaction of the integrated  information
>>> systems (or, using any other informational models). By the  way,
>>> following the second way we, from the very start, will encounter
>>> no "hard problem" at all, while the first way presumes the "hard
>>> problem" has yet to be solved. The second way starts from the
>>> conscious  subject and aims to explain the physical world around
>>> him, and his  place and role in that world, while the first way
>>> starts from the  "dead" matter and regards conscious subject as a
>>> physical object (or, a  product of evolution of the "dead" matter).
>>> As a scientist, I treat  both ways worth to be tried. It is
>>> important only that the selected way  is not ending at an impasse.
>>
>> LM:  The only way I see to arrive at a comprehensive science of
>> consciousness is to use a path of logical reasoning, based on
>> fundamental principles, that follows a causal chain of cosmogenesis
>> starting from the initial zero-point-instant singularity containing
>> the root of all subjectivity and objectivity, through the emanation,
>> involution and evolution of total manifest spacetime, until our
>> physical reality is reached... When we can then study the actual
>> mechanisms of consciousness that lead to the final explanation of all
>> the hard problems ? such as;
>> (1) the experience of consciousness a singular points of perception
>> (i.e., taste on the tongue, smell in the nose, touch on the skin,
>> sight and hearing at a single point in the center of the head)
>> (2) the binding of mind to brain, and the storage, recollection,
>> remembrances, etc. of long term memory (lifetime, archetypal,
>> instinctual, species, etc.
>> (3) non locality of individual consciousness throughout all sentient
>> beings.
>> (4) group consciousness such as in ant colonies, human mobs, animal
>> herds, etc.
>> (5) psychic phenomenal, such as OOBE, NDE, telepathy, clairvoyance,
>> dreams, psychic healing, placebo effects, etc., etc.
>>
>> As far as I can see, any purely reductive materialistic scientific
>> approach toward understanding the mechanisms and explaining the
>> subjective experience of consciousness, mind-memory, thought, etc.
>> will always lead to an impasse or dead end ? since subjectivity and
>> objectivity are two different categories of fundamental reality, and
>> consciousness/matter are two sides of the same coin that can never be
>> conflated or one derived from the other.
>>
>> Best wishes,
>> Leon Maurer
>> http://tinyurl.com/astrobiocoen
>>
>>
>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

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