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

Re: [jcs-online] Re: Re: Essay: Visual Reconstruction

Nov 13, 2007 01:28 PM
by Leon Maurer

On Nov 5, 2007, at 11/5/075:31 AM, Chris Lofting wrote:

>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: [mailto:jcs- 
>>] On
>> Behalf Of Leon Maurer
>> Sent: Sunday, 4 November 2007 6:43 PM
>> To: undisclosed-recipients:
>> Subject: [jcs-online] Re: Re: Essay: Visual Reconstruction
> <snip>
>> In my view (speculative, admittedly, based solely on the geometric
>> and electrodynamic logic of my ABC theory of cosmogenesis ?)... While
>> the physical form of sentient beings evolve... Consciousness, being a
>> fundamental quality of primal space, that is ubiquitous in every  
>> zero-
>> point source of ZPE in the Planck vacuum, cannot evolve... Since,
>> without any evidence to the contrary, consciousness (awareness, will,
>> qualia, etc.) is most likely the latent subjective quality of
>> fundamental space-time itself.  Also, there is no evidence that
>> memory (especially long term) is carried by or stored in the brain.
> IMHO your off the planet again - Some oldies first re STM and LTM:

LM:  Sure.  Since I'm talking about conditions -- that came long  
before this planet or any of its particles emerged out of the primal  
soup at the third fractal stage of Cosmic involution at the Big Bang  
-- which underly all your IDM theories, its fractal mathematics, and  
establishes all the fundamental laws of nature that govern the  
neurology and it operations that you base all your top down reductive/ 
inductive theories on... That have little to do with fundamental  
causes or analogous genesis of the cosmos, along with all subsequent  
phenomenally conscious sentient beings (that culminate in thinking  
mankind) -- other than explaining meanings and confirming that the  
origin of your fractal geometry was inherent in absolute SPACE from  
the primal beginning.

> (1)
> (2)
> A dominating feature of the neurology is the focus on conversion of  
> analogue
> to digital, from AM (waves) to FM (pulses) and so a focus of the  
> use of,
> sensitivity to, frequencies ( 
> Frequency ) What
> is also present is the sensitivity of emotions to sensory harmonics  
> and
> recollection of data (and so a smell, colour, sound, taste, or  
> feeling can
> set off a recall of some event and rich associations with other  
> events  -
> this gets into the generation of rich associative memories from  
> rote XOR
> events - as done in the EPR experiments where they too show what  
> happens
> when you self-reference a dichotomy with varying degrees of  
> indeterminacy -
> a constructive/destructive wave interference pattern emerges that  
> at the
> classical level we map to a developing, rich, associative memory  
> and all in
> our brains)

LM: Gobbledygook.  Since when are frequency modulated wave patterns  
considered as digital?  What is the storage medium of the memory's FM  
signals?  How are they generated in the brain? How are they stored in  
memory and detected and discriminated down to the subtlest color  
frequency, by perceptive consciousness?  What is the nature of the  
perceiver?  Where does the emotional energy come from?  How, where,  
and what is experiencing the tasting, smelling, seeing, hearing,  
thinking, associating, emotions, etc.?

To claim the neural correlates are equivalent to the experience of  
consciousness or are experiencing the qualia and responding to it  
willfully and determinatively is simplistic nonsense, based solely on  
circular reasoning and indirect if not irrelevant evidence.  How is  
long term memory, including archetypal and other subliminal memories  
stored in the brain tissue that is in constant flux, and in some  
measured number of years, has been completely replaced?  Where are  
the memories of all the evolutionary progressive forms in the growing  
fetus stored before it develops a human brain?   Your vague  
references and bald assertions that all of conscious experience, both  
efferent and afferent, and all memories are functions of, initiated  
or carried out solely in our brains, is complete nonsense.  The brain  
cannot think, feel, perceive, discern, discriminate, decide, choose,  
selectively move the body, or do anything that is reserved solely for  
subjective, 1st person consciousness... Any counter argument or ad  
hominem denial to the contrary notwithstanding.

> Analysis of the dendrite 'bush' for all neurons shows changes in
> spines/sprouts (parts of the dendrites) post some experience as  
> well as the
> presence of such from birth. This indicates encoding/decoding  
> dynamics and
> the use of context to PUSH behaviours, the dendrites being the main  
> input
> areas for neural activities.

LM: So, how does the "bush" material experience the qualia and  
discriminatively determine to "PUSH" the behaviours of the organism?  
IOW, What or who decides to make the PUSH in one direction or  
another?  Or are you saying that the brain makes all our decisions  
and thinks for us, and remembers all the details off our life?  If so  
then why can't we extract that information and re-record it like we  
can the information stored on an analog or digital tape or disk? Why  
is nature's storage of the information more complex than that? How  
does that fit in with Occam's razor?
> This encoding at the level of the neuron and/or collectives of, is  
> brought
> out in people who have had amputations where the neurons once  
> associated
> with the limb are recruited by nearby neurons to serve THEIR  
> purpose such as
> respond to facial stimulus. In this process it has been found that the
> MEMORIES of the amputated limb can be elicited by, for example,  
> stimulus of
> the face, indicating that the memories of the limb are retained by the
> neuron(s) even when they are recruited for something else.

LM: For this to happen, you will have to show where and in what form  
the memories are stored, and how and in what they elicit the phantom  
pain.  These reductive arguments based on contrived experiments prove  
nothing... And, even if valid, confirm that overlapping coenergetic  
fields in the brain could just as easily account for the phantom limb  
observations, as well as the recalled memory of the pain in an  
amputated appendage.  And far more simply and reasonably at that --  
since there is no longer any need to *prove* the existence of the  
higher order ZPE fields <> in  
hyperspace that are causative, and informative of all the physical  
fields and forms of  matter, from the quantum level on up.  Maybe you  
should take a look at Sheldrake's theory of morphogenetic fields.

And also Study the work of physicist, Amit Goswami

In any event, your materialistically limited IDM theory cannot  
predict the nature of the ZPE forces, or explain anything about them  
-- other than that they would have to obey all the fundamental  
electrodynamic and cyclic laws of nature (with no indeterminacies at  
that symmetric level) as well as the built-in holographic, fractal,  
spiral vortex spherical geometry of the initial *spinergy* (i.e.,   
near infinite nonlinear angular momentum) of the primal zero-point  
Singularity of absolute SPACE that gave them birth...  As well as  
being the derivation of all the physical phenomena and psychological  
rules of meaning that would come after the breaking of symmetry on  
the third fractal involution of the holographically analogous primal  
ABC/ZPE fields. (Do I have to analyze this statement in detail to  
allow you to understand its meaning intuitionally, logically, or  
mathematically? ;-)  Naturally, I don't expect you to take it as a  
scientific fact and dump your eliminative materialism, until you can  
prove it for yourself or be able to infer it from objective  
evidence.  I won't hold my breath. ;-)

> Ramachandran.2000.pdf
> the essential feature here is in the transference of motor neurons  
> for limb
> to contribute to those for face (where these neurons lie near each  
> other in
> the body image encoded into the brain covering sensory-motor neuron
> dynamics) and in that transference is included memory.

LM: Still no information about where and in what form the memory  
information is stored and how it generates the subjective pain?  To  
say the subjective experience is an epiphenomena of or emerges from  
the neural processing is a cop out.  I've already mentioned other  
simpler electrodynamic possibilities for such sensory-motor image  
overlap dynamics, and the coupling with phantom pain perception, as  
well as how  guidance control of body movement in direct 3D  
positional relationship to the visual and objective field works.  To  
ascribe such dynamics to the neurology alone is just guesswork based  
on indirect observation of the neural activity at the physical  
sensory impression level.
> This material severely damages your overall perspective you have  
> presented
> above and below and so clearly demonstrates that ABC as presented is
> hogwash; unnecessarily complex, imagination run riot, where the  
> application
> of Occam's razor brings out the simplicity of the issue re memory and
> amputations etc.

LM: Not so at all... Since my model does explain all the questions  
asked by me above, as well as resolves all the hard problems -- far  
more parsimoniously and rationally than the vague materialistic  
neurological and psychological assumptions based on IDM.  The  
explanation of the issue re memory and amputation has so many  
explanatory gaps in it with reference to memory storage,  
transmission, and perception, that it radically violates Occam's  
razor? on those levels.  Your assumption that memory is a function of  
the neurology remains as unproven and imaginative as you claim is my  
logical deduction that all long term memory and mind is a function of  
the ZPE fields entangled in hyperspace everywhere within and  
surrounding all living organic forms.

?Incidentally, since Occam's razor assumes reductive materialism as  
the accepted paradigm of physical science, it has no relevance to any  
alternative paradigm that might be the way the universe actually  
works on the underlying metaphysical, "implicate", or hyperspace  
level.  Therefore, you cannot use any "proof" or theory on the  
physical level to falsify the theoretical functions of the  
metaphysical level or to deny any theory of cosmogenesis -- and  
particularly, one that doesn't violate the non-renormalized original  
mathematics of general relativity.
> This ability to adapt to change, neural plasticity, is brought to  
> the fore
> especially in the case of early age removal of a hemisphere such  
> that one
> hemisphere ends up taking on the dynamics of both and doing it  
> reasonably
> well. As such, a limb is not amputated, a brain-'limb' is. If  
> caught early
> enough, whilst the brain is still adapting to context, the
> differentiating/integrating biases appear to develop in the remaining
> hemisphere.

LM: Which is far better explained by the electrodynamic storage and  
transmission of memory information as a function of the higher order,  
longer lasting fields in hyperspace -- that carry all the images  
necessary to rebuild and re-conform the brain tissue from the bottom  
up -- in direct electrodynamic conjunction with the coenergetic  
information fields of the DNA.  Thus, the memory of the amputated  
limb never disappears from the dynamic and resonantly interconnected  
higher order fields that interpenetrate the ENTIRE brain, and thus  
the function of one hemisphere can be simply transformed into the  
other hemisphere -- like the visual field of the rear cortex  
intertwines and resonantly links with the kinesthetic body model  
field in the kinesthetic cortex. This obeys all the laws of  
electrodynamics such as magnetic induction, resonance, harmony, etc.   
Therefore, it's fields, not forms, that are the essential  
intermediaries of the consciousness memory storage and transmission  
processes -- which assist in fostering perception, thought, qualia,  
and all the rest of the subjective qualities of mind, memory and  
senses in conjunction with awareness and will.
> This neural plasticity would NOT be required, would not have been  
> favoured
> in any selection process, if your proposed model was valid.

LM: It certainly would, since the neurology is essential as the  
malleable mechanical and information processing bridge between the  
senses, neuromuscular system, mind, memory and consciousness.
> Furthermore, your continued disregard for the XOR material covering  
> deeper
> encoding of information from self-referencing brings out your  
> denial of
> alternative perspectives to ABC where such perspectives can force a  
> major
> re-think re your ontology in that you are ignoring a fundamental of  
> the
> epistemology as identified by IDM.

LM: All of the material systems in the brain (that may or may not  
function in accord with the XOR operation) as well as the  
electrodynamic fields that carry the frequency modulated wave  
interference patterned information of consciousness -- would require  
a primal source, and subsequent ontology starting from the  
"singularity" of pre cosmic absolute space that is consistent with  
the theory of General Relativity... And, accordingly, offers a basis  
for all subsequent laws of nature.  The ABC hypothesis covers this  
ontology in meticulous and logical geometric detail from the bottom  
up, that precedes and underlies all the fractal geometry's you base  
your top down theory of IDM on.

For a geometric overview of this model -- based on the scientific  
paradigm that consciousness and matter are dual aspects of absolute  
primal SPACE, and that all substance is fundamentally rooted in  
primal spin momentum, located at the origin of ZPE, that is entangled  
everywhere in the Planck vacuum throughout metric spacetime -- see  
the following graphic illustrations:

I think I have explained the dynamics of how consciousness works in  
relation to mind, memory, brain, neuromuscular system, senses, etc.  
-- in enough detail previously -- so as to not have to repeat it again.

As for your information with reference to IDM...  I have no further  
comments except to agree that it satisfactorily explains the basis of  
meaning that may be useful for psychologists and oracles... But has  
no scientific relevance (other than as a confirmation of its  
differentially integrated fractal geometric roots) to the ABC  
ontology of cosmogenesis, its involution and subsequent empirical  
evolution, nor to the actual cause and mechanisms of consciousness...  
In ALL its  subjecive aspects, and in all sentient beings -- some  
with and some without brains. ;-)

> Chris.
>> Therefore, it follows that it could be one or more of these higher
>> order, longer lasting entangled fields in "hyperspace" (i.e., the
>> Planck vacuum) that would necessarily have to be the carriers of long
>> term memory information... And thus, while the brain is the source of
>> the final electrodynamic wave interference patterns of experiential
>> information that are stored holographically encoded in the memory
>> fields and recalled in the mind, the brain is not necessary for the
>> acquisition, discernment, discrimination, or consideration of these
> memories by conscious mind...
>> Even though the activation of the memories in thought will reflect as
>> resonant harmonics in the brain that are detected by fMRI... Leading
>> to the false assumption that the brain is processing the memory
>> recollection and contributing to the experiencing of it in  
>> consciousness.
>> I like to think of this as a joke being played on reductive
>> scientists, and particularly psychologists and neuroscientists who
>> believe that objective empirical or behavioral evidence is enough to
>> explain all of fundamental objective as well as subjective realities.
>> :-)
>> Best wishes,
>> ?

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

[Back to Top]

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