Theos-Talk Archives (September 2010 Message tt00029)

John, 

I really can't see where there is any connection between Ehrenfestâs fields and the bending of light around solid objects so that they become invisible. The only way that can be done seems to be to wear a physical cloak that receives the image of the background on one side and transmits it as a comparable image on the front side.  This has already been done with a very complex system of micro lenses and micro LEDS but the cloaked object's degree of transparency and accuracy in duplicating the actual background image, under normal lighting, on the frontside is quite poor.  And then the system can work in only one viewing direction. 

So, as far as I can see, all such means to achieve invisibility is highly limited, and really has nothing to do with the invisibility of dark matter fields, or any other radiant fields covered in my ABC model 

Leon

On Sep 7, 2010, at 9/7/1011:37 AM, Augoeides-222@hMTFXiqNZWZoWV8bR8DQAp9q3K4gdoZ6sWovgY9zlsshpwdOGtel-SpsTwbiM3ZhnDy-zSSESfieKsEgKaOHuw.yahoo.invalid wrote:

> Leon, 
> In regards to your most recent post in particular about the "Dark Energy" 96 %. What do you think of the possibility's shown in this article as to dark matter? : 
> 
> Invisibility Physics - Acceleration without Radiation 
> 
>>>> http://skullsinthestars.com/2008/04/19/invisibility-physics-acceleration-without-radiation-part-i/<<< 
> 
> John 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Leon Maurer" <leonmaurer@k1TeBkrVaxxnnqStR6M2Ovva2rs_yluX2sZgfdGbUyYeZ7P1zunYyv1dTnp1w52t9UmmmvvbVHN2.yahoo.invalid> 
> To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
> Sent: Monday, September 6, 2010 12:03:42 PM 
> Subject: theos-talk Questioning the scientific basis and validity of consciousness theories; 
> 
> To all it may concern, 
> 
> The following is in response to questions related to my ABC theory of cosmogenesis, consciousness and mind*** -- implying that it cannot be scientific, since it starts from fundamental principles or propositions, and constructively deduces and makes predictions by causatively reasoning outward or upward from the Zero-Point primal beginning or cosmic singularity -- rather than, as is the usual case in physics, starting from the present conditions and working reductively inward or downward. IOW, starting with the origin or whole to deductively determine the parts, rather than starting with the parts to inductively determine the origin. 
> 
> Apparently, the latter method will never achieve its aim to comprehend actual manifest reality or total spacetime, since the whole is far greater than the sum of its observable parts. And, the scientific mathematics, limited to physical objects in space along with their interactive and internal dynamics, could never explain actual reality or link matter, space, time and information with consciousness, mind and memory. So, the present goal of physical science to find a unified field theory of everything, and describe it mathematically, is destined to fail -- since it can never put immaterial consciousness, information, mind and memory in its renormalized equations. 
> 
> (Whether either approach is considered "top down" or "bottom up", is just a question of relative point of view -- since consciousness is both outside and inside, and essential to both.) 
> 
> Also, since the first manifestation of the cosmos would have to be an infinitely inflated, near infinite frequency, radiant electro-gravitational field that is equivalent to the mass energy of total spacetime -- what's wrong or unscientific about an initial premise that such a radiant field must have begun with a source of equivalent potential energy compacted within its zero-point center of origin? 
> 
> How could metric mass-energy or manifest force come from nothing -- especially, if the laws of conservation, symmetry, and thermodynamics must remain valid throughout both total metric spacetime and non-metric pre-space-time? IOW, the unconditioned zero-point origin of the cosmos would have to contain at least the total potential mass-energy of the entire cosmos in its initial state of manifestation. 
> 
> What's wrong, then, with the further proposition (since energy cannot be separated from motion) that this total potential ZP energy would have to be in the form of angular spin momentum of the primal or empty (of form) absolute zero-point space (or "singularity") that gave birth to the cosmos. Wouldn't such an absolute zero-point have to be located at the exact center origin of its initial (highest frequency) fractal involved harmonic radiant EM/G (electromagnetic/gravitational) field? 
> 
> To fully comprehend this, we must realize that no spherical field composed of parallel radiant lines or "strings" of force could exist if such force rays didn't pass through a common ZP center, and follow a continuously repeating Mobius-Klein spiral vortex, double helix path. To fully comprehend this, imagine such a 2-D linear form as a figure eight inside a circle... And visualize it as a 3-D Field, by rotating it laterally around its vertical axis. Compare such a 3-D field with the analogous and corresponding magnetic field of the Earth. 
> 
> Therefore, what's wrong with further proposing that the electromagnetic aspect (of that overall, triune, near infinite frequency, initial radiant field) is the expanding or outgoing linear force waves-- and that its Gravity aspect is the compressing or incoming force waves? While noting that this initial spacetime field must be in the form of a toroidal spiral vortex double helix that is continuously expanding and contracting inward and outward to form a hyperspherical standing wave... Such a field would appear, in cross section, as twin bubbles within a surrounding bubble. 
> 
> How could there be any laws of physics if that were not the fundamental structure of all possible radiant spacetime fields? Wouldn't all fundamental individual particle-wave forms (on any spacetime field frequency level) originating from and forming around their own ZP centers of spin momentum (at various mass/energies) have to follow that identical field structure (like bubbles, within bubbles, within bubbles, etc.)? 
> 
> Accordingly, since the zero-point spin would have to be on infinite radial axes, wouldn't all inner fields fractally involve laterally around their own ZP centers (similar to the initial mother field) and continue fractally involving, analogously and correspondingly, ad infinitum -- while they step down harmonically, in progressively decreasing frequency phase orders -- until the zero-point is reached on the lowest order physical/material plane of spacetime we all live on? 
> 
> Wouldn't this all occur, first on the cosmic level, prior to the breaking of symmetry on the lowest frequency "physical" field -- when, on breaking of symmetry, the particle-standing waves (photons) simultaneously appear -- after the apparent "big Bang" presumed by conventional standard model physics? 
> 
> Isn't all of that entirely consistent with General Relativity Theory, and partially with string, superstring/M, and other LQG theories which consolidates GRT with QM, QED, QCD and other quantum theories, etc.-- even though those theories do not go far enough beyond the hyperspace fields of the lowest cosmic frequency phase order physical universe? 
> 
> Isn't it obvious, then, that all such theories would be incapable of ever reaching the primal cause of the total space time cosmos, or coming anywhere near understanding the true basis and nature of consciousness, mind, memory, and how they interrelate and interact with the brain-body-senses, etc.? 
> 
> So, doesn't all that indicate that the universe is eternal (as Einstein proposed) -- since it always exists in potentiality within its ZPE source -- even though it periodically goes through cycles of manifestation and dormancy or latency, in accord with immutable cyclic law inherent in its original spin? 
> 
> Therefore, what's wrong with proposing that, starting with the initial field of cosmogenesis, all subsequent fields are automatically created through fractal involved harmonics descending in lawful frequency phase orders down to our physical spacetime level -- and thence to the smallest particle standing waves at and through the quantum level, to the Planck level -- and there proceeding on down through its virtual particle-wave fields to the ZPE or angular spin momentum itself? 
> 
> Wouldn't that be sufficient to indicate that all particles are substantially hyperspherical standing waves, and that their dynamics is based solely on the attractive and repulsive electro-gravitation-magnetic processes rooted in fundamental spin momentum? Wouldn't their particle nature, then, be the mass-energy of their ZPE source, and their wave nature, the surrounding spherical standing wave field? 
> 
> If so, that could explain the apparent particle wave duality paradox, and make the idea of "wave collapse" an unnecessary and misleading assumption of quantum physics. It would also discredit any quantum theory that assumes consciousness is connected with or epiphenomena of such imaginary "wave collapse"... Thus, eliminating any idea that consciousness is the result of quantum processes in the brain. 
> 
> In addition, such a determinate structure of fundamental particle-waves, as well as consciousness being a fundamental aspect of absolute ZP space underlying relative spacetime, could discredit the current ideas of quantum indeterminacy, as well as explain quantum entanglement and apparent probability functions... While resolving the double slit paradox and offering a reasonable basis for Einstein's disagreement with the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum physics. Further, it would also make Hawking's recent conclusions -- that our universe is a random accident out of infinite possible universes having different properties -- very unlikely... 
> 
> Since, according to the holographic ABC fractal involved field paradigm -- unconditioned absolute space can have only one fundamental law based on infinite spin momentum. Thus, every possible cosmos, originating out of any 3 perpendicular spherical axes of that zero-point spin momentum -- while on different paths of individual evolution, after identical fractal field involution -- would have the identical laws of physics on its lowest frequency phase order physical plane. Whether or not such universes, or any galaxy in them would evolve a planet capable of evolving and sustaining human-like life, is anyone's guess... Although I would assume, since consciousness is fundamentally identical in all such cosmoses, it could very well be possible. 
> 
> Apparently, from that beginning, with infinite zero-point singularities spread out everywhere in metric spacetime, and based on the fundamental laws of cycles inherent in the initial spin, along with its vector equilibrium geometry and its extended fractal topology that is analogous with its field harmonics -- all possible dynamics of the holographic universe can be deduced and predictions made... Many of which have already been verified by physics experiments and cosmological observation. 
> 
> For instance, the 96% dark matter/energy and the 4% light (visible/detectable) matter/energy ratio, suggested by quantum cosmological theorists, is also predicted by the ABC model. Additionally, this theory also tells us what aspect of total cosmic spacetime that dark matter/energy is actually composed of (aside from the total mass of the Planck false vacuum of about 25-28%, which quantum physics already knows about)... I.e., the ABC model predicts dark mass energy fields spinning on the two cosmic spherical axes that are perpendicular to the light matter axis. This separation of the three types of matter-energy would reflect analogously on the lower f/E order physical plane our material bodies exist on. 
> 
> The following diagram symbolically represents the basic geometry of the progression of fractal-involved fields beginning with the first field of cosmogenesis... It also indicates the three different fields of light and dark matter-energy radiating from the spin momentum on each perpendicular axis of the initial highest order (near infinite frequency) cosmic field surrounding them all. 
> http://leonmaurer.info/ABCimages/Fract-Exp-Lt-Dk-matter-text.jpg 
> 
> Apparently, since the fundamental spin momentum source of each type of matter-energy fields rotate on different axial angles of total spacetime, they are undetectable to each other...And thus, isolated from each other, although interconnected through their common ZPE cause and their combined effect on the total spacetime field surrounding them all. Apparently, scientists can observe some of these effects, and can contemplate the existence of such dark matter/energy, but they can never directly determine their substantial nature or dynamics, except by inference and speculation based on observed cosmological, biological, physiological, Para psychological, etc. anomalies, which are unexplainable by their conventional renormalized mathematics. 
> 
> Of course, except for their possible gravitational or spatial distortional effects, and assuming there is a continued apparent expansion of the physical universe that depends on their mass/energy -- these predicted dark matter/energy particle-waves and their hyperspace fields and forces, etc., can never be directly observed or experimentally detected... And thus, doesn't allow for falsification by conventional scientific means. 
> 
> The trouble with all conventional physics and cosmologies is that they work from the outside in or top down, starting with the apparently false (in its basic premises about the essential physical/material nature of total space) Copenhagen/indeterminacy theory of quantum physics and its sister standard model of big bang inflation... which, together, engender questionable particle wave duality paradoxes and meaningless presumptions of complementarities, wave function collapses, expansion of space based solely on red shift Doppler effects (that may have other causes), and other speculative standard model concepts -- many of which are incorrectly interpreted, confuse the (renormalized mathematical) map with the territory, as well as being limited solely to the physical/material aspects of total cosmic reality. Even string and M physics, which are closer to the true reality, still suffer from some of these limitations. 
> 
> This total cosmic reality, which includes fundamental ubiquitous consciousness as the observer/imaginer/creator of all that ever is, was, or ever can be -- is totally beyond the reach of all physical theories of space and time. However, it is fully considered as being fundamental, and clearly explained by the ABC model -- including the source, nature and mechanisms of consciousness (awareness, will, qualia, etc.) as well as how it actually works in conjunction with the holographic information contained in the mind-memory fields... Which information is transmitted through the senses and processed by the brain prior to perception and willful response. To explain the true nature and mechanisms of that perception and willful response is beyond the capability of empirical physical science. 
> 
> The conclusion being that consciousness as well as infinite spin momentum are both fundamental causal aspects of unconditioned absolute space, and all spacetime fields and forms are secondary effects resulting from the interaction between eternal pre cosmic unconditioned consciousness, infinite potential energy (in the form of abstract nonlinear spin momentum) and infinite potential formative and structural information holographically encoded in each absolute zero-point ï presumed as a remembrance recorded from the previous cycles of manifestation (cosmogenesis and its evolution, sentient lifetimes, particular forms, etc.)ï All of which are analogously governed by the immutable law of cycles inherent in and periodicity manifested from the primal spin momentum of each such zero-point origin or singularity. 
> 
> It is this spin momentum of the ubiquitous singularity, coupled with the individual stored information within every zero-point of total manifest spacetime that is the source of every individual field and form in our physical universe -- with each such "laya" point (zero-point of consciousness along with its individual spin momentum) retaining all the information from its previous cyclic manifestations. 
> 
> This characteristic of each zero-point in metric spacetime, would account for the cyclic nature of all fundamental particles, as well as all inorganic and organic sentient forms on our physical/material aspect of total spacetime... With each maximum potential period of manifestation dependent on the total mass-energy of the individual singularity related to each particular form. Thus, individual particles, atoms, and most molecules have a considerably longer life than the composite forms or bodies they are parts of. 
> 
> Therefore, the higher the total energy of the particular form or the source of the field at any hyperspace level of total spacetime, the longer its maximum potential lifetime -- since all such spin momentum singularities, when manifest or radiated would have potentially infinite harmonics, up to the near infinite highest frequency phase order (triune spiritual-mental-astral) field... Even when the physical form and its lower order EM fields cyclically dissolve and cease to be, such higher order informative fields remain intact so long as the total universal or cosmic field exists... It being understood, that all such resonant field harmonics carry he formative information as holograms on their surfaces. In humans, this highest order field is the outermost triune field surrounding the body -- which we might call the human "soul" or its "monad". See: 
> http://leonmaurer.info/ABCimages/Chakrafielddiag-fig.col.jpg 
> 
> Obviously, since consciousness must observe and discriminate between the subtlest variations of vibratory motion, i.e., modulated wave interference patterned information carried as holograms on the mind and memory fields... It must be absolutely stationary relative to the surrounding field carrying the information perceived. (How this enables us to accurately navigate in the visual 3-D world (we see or hear in the mind) and that physically surrounds us, is fully explained in the ABC model. See website "How It All Began" below.) 
> 
> The only place in metric space that fulfills this "static consciousness" requirement is at each stationary zero-point of view in the center of our head, and also of the radiant information-carrying field -- which conscious zero-point could only be an aspect of the ubiquitous unconditioned absolute ZP space that underlies all metric spacetime. Also, apparently, both the perceptive awareness and responsive will must be complementary aspects of that same zero-point. 
> 
> Thus, giving further experiential evidence that consciousness is fundamental, and that individual consciousness is, in essence, identical to cosmic consciousness... While further giving credence to the possibility for individual consciousness to observe not only the sensory information, but also all possible beings on the higher order physical hyperspace fields (astral mental, etc.), as well as the even higher order metaphysical cosmic fields, up to the highest order cosmic spiritual monad field -- we might call, "God". 
> 
> For how these fields interrelate analogously, see: 
> http://leonmaurer.info/ABCimages/Chakrafield-spherical-col_3.jpg 
> http://leonmaurer.info/ABCimages/Cyclic-paths-cosmogenesis.jpg 
> 
> We all know that wherever our conscious POV (point of view) is located, it always appears to be at the exact center of the visual universe. This could only be possible if the image of the physical universe is carried as a wave interference patterned hologram on the surface of its overall spacetime field -- which is resonant with our brain-transformer's EM field and with our higher physical frequency mind-memory fields in (astral/mental) hyperspace... With all such fields (each extending through infinite harmonics) being coadunate (occupying the same metric space) but not consubstantial (not of the same mass-energy density)... Thus, (since all such fields are resonant with each other) explaining all psi phenomena, entanglement, holographic principle, etc. etc. See my full explanations at: 
> ***http://knol.google.com/k/how-it-all-began# (now with accompanying illustrations) 
> 
> Also see new published article, "How Unconditioned Consciousness, Infinite Information, Potential Energy, and Time Created Our Universe" at. 
> http://www.jcer.com/index.php/jcj/article/view/85 (abstract and PDF link) -- or 
> Online reprint: 
> http://leonmaurer.tripod.com/ 
> 
> Articles, planned to follow: (expanded from "How It All Began") 
> 1. How Our Consciousness Perceives Mental Images in a Holographic Universe. 
> 2. How Our Consciousness Perceives Holographic Information, Thinks about, Gains and Retains Knowledge. 
> 3. What Mind And Memory Are Made Of - How They Mediate Between Consciousness, the Brain-Body And the Outside World. 
> 
> Best wishes, 
> Leon Maurer 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> = 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------ 
> 
> Yahoo! Groups Links 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------
> 
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
>