[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: [jcs-online] Re: The External Image as Implicit Self Awareness?

Jan 31, 2007 08:03 PM
by leonmaurer

Thought you might be interested in this. 

The following is one of my best arguments yet for the validity of my ABC 
field model of universal evolution -- that is consistent with both theosophical 
metaphysics and most theories of physics (while contradicting some) ... Even 
though it cannot (yet) be demonstrated scientifically by objective observation or 
mathematical logic.   However, even after the past 15 years of concentrated 
study by all scientific disciplines, they still haven't come up with any 
alternate theory of consciousness, mind and perception, or how they link to the 
material brain and its processes -- which answers all the questions as simply and 
logically as ABC theory does. 


In a message dated 1/30/07 9:00:48 AM, writes:

Wow!!! I love this, really. You're the man.

>Subject: Re: [jcs-online] Re: The External Image as Implicit Self
>Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2007 18:31:42 EST
>In a message dated 1/15/07 8:36:26 AM, writes:
> > "So if holography is to serve as a metaphor for consciousness, the key
> > question is whether the metaphorical hologram is illuminated by coherent
> > light to produce a volumetric spatial pattern of light, or whether the
> > hologram in experience is like a holographic plate in the dark. If it is 
> > former, then conscious experience in this metaphor is the pattern of 
> > waves interfering in three-dimensional space. It is a spatial image that
> > occupies a very specific portion of physical space, and it requiresenergy 

> > to maintain it in that space. This is exactly the kind of mechanism we
> > should be looking for in the brain. If it were the latter, as Velmans
> > suggests, then why would the shape of our experience not be that of the
> > interference patterns etched on the holographic plate, rather than the
> > volumetric image that they encode? What magical substance or process in
> > conscious experience performs the volumetric reconstruction that in the
> > real universe requires an actual light beam and some complicated 
> > process to reconstruct? If it is a spatial structure that we observe in
> > consciousness, then it is a spatial structure that we must seek out in 
> > brain, not a potentially spatial structure that remains stillborn in a
> > non-spatial form. Otherwise the spatial image-like nature that is so 
> > a property of subjective experience must remain a magical mystica entity
> > ever in principle beyond the reach of science."

>And so it is... Especially, if we assume -- in accordance with my ABC theory
>of fractally involved coenergetic (i.e., electrodynamic) fields originating 
>the zero-point singularity of cosmic origin, and replicating analogously by
>reflection from every zero-point field everywhere in our physical space --
>that the mind is one of those invisible higher order fields that is 
>with the EM field of the brain.
>If this is so, then the binocular images from the twin retinas, when
>processed through the brain's neurology eventually forms the holographic
>interference patterns -- due to the different angular incidence of coherent 
>rays of sidereal light striking each corresponding rod and cone in each eye 
>which are, after electrodynamic processing and assembly in the brain, 
>transferred to the brain's overall EM field to be carried on its surface and
>instantaneously transferred coenergetically (by inductive resonant 
>to the adjacent mind field.
>Once there, in that higher order space with its own analogous frequency of
>light in its analogous higher order electromagnetic spectrum -- those
>interference patterns can be easily detected and holographically 
>simply by willfully projecting a coherent ray of that higher order 
spectrum's white
>light from our zero-point of perceptive visual consciousness in the center 
>our head exactly located between the eyes and the ears -- which is then 
>back from the internal mentally carried hologram to be directly experienced
>as a surrounding holographic image field that is in exact superposition with
>the outer objective world composed of different modulations of sidereal 
>that is reflected to the eyes and focussed on the rods and cones of the 
>Thus, we actually see, in perfect 3-dimensional depth and spatial synchrony,
>the inner holographic replica image, as if it were projected outward to the
>world in front of our eyes.
>Rather than trying to consider the complexities of almost impossibly trying
>to explain such a process by contriving all sorts of imaginary physical
>mechanisms to explain both consciousness and the holographic nature of what
>appears to be direct vision of the objective world -- the simplicity of this
>metaphysical process would necessarily be the most parsimonious method that
>"intelligent" nature would use...   Since it already had designed perfect 
>eyes at the exact distance apart to create viable informational wave 
>patterns, to be further processed by its almost omniscient and equally 
>designed (even by ideal image guided trial and error) neural network, that 
>produce perfect holographic replicas in the mind field of the outer world
>--without projecting any invisible beams into that outer world.
>The beauty of this simple concept is that, due to the structurally assembled
>3D EM field image capabilities of the brain, the visual field and the
>kinesthetic body field can be in exact superposition so that the position
>of the body can be perfectly mapped to the visual field at will, without any
>sequential calculation -- so long as we keep our eye on the ball. :-)
>How else could an outfielder catch a fly ball on the run and the jump -- 
with no 
>conscious thought at all?
>Best wishes,
>Leon Maurer
> > Steve Lehar

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

[Back to Top]

Theosophy World: Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application