Theos-Talk Archives (January 2008 Message tt00273)

On Jan 21, 2008, at 1/21/0811:15 AM, Philip Benjamin wrote:

> Hi:
>
> Here (bottom) is not a conflict of personalities, but of world- 
> views in science-garb. One seems to be more of an applied science  
> or engineering and the other of physics.
>
> Since there is no mathematical basis suggested or formulated, nor  
> observable evidences of any kind. both are just subjective views  
> and opinions, not evidential hypotheses or empirical observations.  
> Even if there are some rational equations for the physical  
> componets of these imaginations, there is no factor corresponding  
> to mind or consciousness possible.
>
> Since both have the inscrutable enigma of 'Mind" or "Consciousness"  
> in REAL time and REAL space as an imagined achievable explicatory  
> goal, both views take the appearance of 'dealing with REALITIES' in  
> a field where any immagination is not unothodox, but assumes a  
> reality of its own. A mirage is REAL physicality, only there is no  
> water in it.
>
> A Cosmic Egg suggested here is just that, be it Chinese or Hindu.  
> It is nothing more and nothing less. Those 'infallible super-wise'  
> Sages or gods or whatever titles befit the culture and life styles  
> of their devotees, never meant or knew any modern science, despite  
> the claims of notables of the stature of Oppenheimer and Bohm and  
> Pauli to the contrary. These rishis or maharishis meant a REAL egg,  
> only Too Big. It is incredulous to derive any science or even  
> philosophy out of these conjectures which are so evidently  
> superstitious and gallingly mindless. All that it does is making  
> modern science itself a cosmic egg-head!
> Naiveté knows no limits.
>
No. The Hindu and Chinese philosopher-scientists (as well as all  
practical theosophists) only use the "egg" as a metaphor -- since  
they know that there could not be a chicken (phenomenal universe)  
without an egg (noumenal universe) or an egg without a chicken.  The  
real naiveté is on the part of egg-head scientists who religiously  
believe that something can come from nothing, or blindly accept an  
imaginary personal godhead who can make miracles.

Could we imagine any sentient being, that evolves from our phenomenal  
universe, NOT consisting of both subjective awareness (i.e.,  
consciousness) and objective substance (i.e., matter-energy)?  Or,  
could we imagine either of those necessities for independent  
existence, NOT being inherent (at least noumenally) in whatever "egg"  
gave birth to that universal being -- which, in turn, gives birth to  
all its internal sentient beings of lesser life spans, intelligence,  
consciousness, etc. -- ad infinitum?  Isn't it obvious, then, that  
this cosmic being must be reflected analogously within every human  
being that exists at the peak of sentient organismic evolution?  So,  
how could the cosmos, as reflected in every human brain-body, NOT be  
a hologram -- as Bohm-Pribram pointed out?  And, if so -- how could  
all its interconnected energy fields NOT be fractally involved out of  
one common (entangled) zero-point singularity -- that is located  
everywhere in the gravitational field of physical spacetime?

Since conventional science is based on the assumption that everything  
and every experience (both subjective and objective) stems from an  
initial matter which exists all by itself -- it's empirical  
materialistic physics is so limited philosophically, it could never  
see the forest for the trees, or even speculate about the overall  
underlying reality with any sort of rational argument.  Therefore, I,  
think Oppenheimer, Pauli, Bohm, Whitehead, Einstein, Schrödinger,  
Klein, Pribram, et al, recognized that fallacy in scientific  
thinking, and had some reasonable arguments to state their case...  
Just as the string theorists with their multidimensional hyperspace  
fields, superstrings, M-branes, etc. have some equally logical  
reasoning as well as mathematics to state theirs (even though they  
still can't see the dynamic and informational connection between  
matter and consciousness, or explain the fundamental source of both  
-- without resorting to epiphenomenalism... Which is a weak cop out  
and just as "superstitious" as believing in a separate godhead that  
creates everything by magic.

Since conventional reductive materialist science can't even come  
close to explaining non material consciousness, its source, its  
qualia, its will energy, its non-locality, its informational  
connection to and binding with mind, memory, brain body, world,  
etc. ... I think my ABC model -- based on consciousness as a  
fundamental quality of Absolute mother SPACE -- is a reasonable  
solution to all these problems. Especially when we consider that the  
fractally involved higher frequency-energy order electrodynamic  
fields radiating from its spin momentum, are the media of all the  
encoded and modulated information of consciousness (e.g., mind,  
memory, body model or map, autonomic instincts, latent learning,  
knowledge, etc.)... With such *hyperspace* fields -- based on the  
obvious holographic as well as fundamental electrodynamic nature of  
ALL reality -- carrying all such information as modulated wave  
interference patterns on their surfaces.

Couldn't this interrelated and entangled hyperspace zero-point field  
system also explain the underlying basis of all commonly experienced  
and repeatedly reported psi phenomena?  And doesn't the three  
dimensional (3-axis) involutions of all such fields of matter-energy,  
also explain the origin of the two forms of analogous dark matter- 
energy -- whose added gravitational effects are observed by the  
cosmologists?

What is the fear in the minds of the committed physicalist scientists  
that prevents them from even considering the possibility of such a  
rationally logical cosmogenesis, that is beyond all superstitions,  
mysticisms. or religious beliefs?

On the Cosmic physical level, such fields would extend from the ZPE  
fields in the false vacuum of hyperspace (science's Plank space as  
well as intergalactic space) ) down to the lowest order  
electromagnetic gamma wave field of the brain's combined neural  
network. Thus, unlike conventional physics, in this model there are  
no explanatory gaps or discontinuities in the overall involution and  
evolution of the universe, from the primal beginning to its present  
state of existence -- with both subjectively and objectively] as a  
fundamental unity.  At all levels of phenomenal existence,  
subjectivity (consciousness) without objectivity (matter-energy), or  
objectivity without subjectivity, is unthinkable.  If otherwise,  
science itself would be entirely meaningless.  Q.E.D.

For a descriptive and illustrated overview of the ABC model, see:  
http://canonizer.com/topic.asp/23/13

So, let us argue these holistic theories, either pro and con, using  
reasonable and logical conjecture or proof -- but let's not  
arbitrarily deny them based on groundless preconditioned beliefs and  
opinions, along with irrational and non sequitur ad hominem  
comments.  Any true scientific philosopher or philosophical scientist  
should have a completely open mind to consider all possible  
explanations of fundamental reality without prejudice.

I look forward to whatever such scientists/philosophers might have to  
say with respect to any unified field theory of everything (including  
consciousness) or my ABC theory in particular.

Best wishes,

Leon Maurer
>
> Best Regards
>
> Philip Benjamin
>
> From: HELENDRUMS@msn.com
> To: leonmaurer@aol.com; medinuclear@hotmail.com
> Subject: Re: SUSY Universe
> Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2008 23:30:04 -0500
>
>
> No Leon. Like you I derive everything from a singularity. Actually  
> absolute space is derived from a 26d singularity and the space of  
> our universe is derived from 16d singularity. Apparently you did  
> not take the time to read my paper. I do believe you can read. The  
> SUSY universe comes from 10d superstring theory, which is secondary  
> to my claim that the compactified space of spins amounts to the  
> mind of god.
>
> The problem with your model is that it is not based on science. For  
> example the electrodynamic field results after three broken  
> symmetries in physics and is not at all fundamental. The unified  
> field is fundamental.
>
> The nature of megaspace or absolute space is that it only carries  
> the force of gravity, which is clearly mention in my paper. How did  
> you miss that?
>
> So my model is an extrapolation of known physics whereas your model  
> contradicts known physics. As far as I can tell your model is a  
> figment of your imagination. The Cosmic Egg of Hindu Bagavatum is  
> of course my 16d black holes that give birth to all universes.
>
> You admit that you do not know physics or math yet persist in using  
> scientific terminology incorrectly. But then you are rather old and  
> it's probably too late the change your thinking. I'm afraid your  
> model will die along with you. Too bad. If you were not so pig  
> headed, it could have amounted to something significant
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Richard
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Leon Maurer
> To: HELEN CHENEY
> Cc: Philip Benjamin
> Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2008 3:38 AM
> Subject: Re: SUSY Universe
>
> Richard,
>
> Thank you for finally backing up your continued unexplained denials  
> and refutations of my ABC holographic field/information/ 
> consciousness theory with such a detailed alternative reductive  
> physics view of overall spatial reality.
>
> I'm afraid that I don't have the detailed knowledge of reductive  
> physics and its mathematics, or even its jargon, to be able to  
> follow your presumptions, assertions,and speculative  
> conclusions...  Let alone comment on its seemingly (to me) anti  
> Occam's razor, over complexity.
>
> The problem is that, as usual you base everything on what appears  
> to be a wrong reductive materialist premise... And instead of  
> seeing the simplicity of starting to build the multidimensional  
> enfolded spaces from their bottom up (inside out), and their  
> natural fractal involution starting from dual parallel rays of ± G- 
> force (of opposite polarity) emanating from a zero-point of  
> infinite spin momentum -- you derive them by compaction from the  
> top down (outside in)... Beginning with the basic assumption that  
> everything starts from a full blown metric and energetic megaspace  
> that is fully evolved and inflated, without any birth or genesis...  
> Out of what? -- I cant imagine... And which your physics can't  
> explain. Apparently, your SUSY universe appears magically out of  
> nothing.
>
> The problem with all your assertions (that seem to deny the  
> progression from primal SPACE that I postulate -- which would have  
> to be a continuous fractal involution of electrodynamic fields  
> starting from an infinite spin momentum -- is that you never  
> explain the underlying causes, structures, interconnections, or the  
> rational involution and evolution behind the spacial dimensions and  
> "particles" you talk about.  For example, what is the nature of the  
> megaspace out of which all other spaces derive?  What gave it  
> birth? and what is the mechanism of such derivation?
>
> So, rather than nit pick your words out of context, I'll just  
> comment below wherever I find some statement or conclusion that  
> doesn't fit with my simple and direct knowledge of the fractally  
> involved genesis of the entire cosmos ... As a unified phenomenal  
> (metric) expression of the all encompassing "megaspace" itself...  
> Starting from its spherically polarized, triune fractal birth out  
> of the infinite abstract motion, or angular momentum of a  
> "singularity", or triple axial spin of Absolute *unconditioned*  
> primal SPACE... Existing eternally as potentially ubiquitous and  
> conscious, infinite "singularities" of potential universes -- that  
> are beyond all *conditioned* metric space and time, and completely  
> unexplainable by any reductive scientific theory limited only to  
> this particular universe ... Even your "branes" could not exist  
> unless they were part of a fundamental unconditioned Absolute SPACE  
> that is beyond all scientific speculations.  Besides, the surfaces  
> of the ABC fractally involved fields could easily account for the  
> "Branes" in SS/M theory.  The difference is between an actual  
> existence based on genetic fractal field geometry, along with an  
> electrodynamics based on fundamental laws of cycles, that can  
> deduce the final effects -- and an assumed pre-existence, out of  
> nothing, based on contrived symbolic mathematical relationships  
> that bypasses causal origin, works back or down from effects, and  
> cannot induce fundamental causes -- nor link to consciousness  
> through a chain of logical informational transformations.
>
> It is This Primal SPACE that is both the creative force and the  
> receptive womb that contains the cosmic eggs out of which all  
> subsequent universes, with their metaphysical hyperspace and  
> physical metric space fields, involve and evolve, simply and  
> directly ... With our cosmos being only one of those infinite  
> universes... All of which are governed by the same fundamental laws  
> rooted in primal spin momentum.
>
> Thus, every thing (all multidimensional space-time fields and all  
> matter-energy forms) throughout all spherically manifest SPACE-TIME  
> universes, are essentially analogous and corresponding, in accord  
> with holographic principles -- based on ubiquitous fractal geometry  
> and spin... And are fundamentally conscious at every non local zero- 
> point source of all fractally involved information/energy fields,  
> ad infinitum.  This, includes all zero-point fields from the ZPE at  
> the Planck level to the black hole centers of every galaxy, nova,  
> star, potential star, planet, organism, organ, cell, virus, etc., etc.
>
> Therefore, right from the beginning, everything (including  
> spacetime itself) is electrodynamic in fundamental nature, and all  
> the laws of electricity, harmony, resonance, capacitance,  
> resistance, etc, universally underly all the physical laws of  
> nature.  As I see it, which incidentally, doesn't contradict any  
> valid or *proven* physics -- it's these laws that are also the  
> roots of all quantum dynamics, and the origin of all cosmic matter- 
> energy fields and their forms and effects.
>
> All that, of course, entirely reverses your cosmology, in which you  
> say, putting the cart before the horse, that "spin is due to the  
> rolling up of a preexistent megaspace" (by a process that cannot be  
> explained) -- with so many twists, turns, and illogical  
> assumptions, that I got lost on the first reductive circular  
> argumentative loop. :-)  In addition, the ABC model fills in the  
> one thing left out in your theory -- by fully explaining the exact  
> method whereby consciousness, information, mind, memory, and matter  
> are interconnected holographically and electrodynamically  
> throughout all the phases and planes of hyperspacial (First Logos)  
> field involutions and physical (metric) spatial evolutions -- that  
> result, after symmetry breaking on the lower frequency-energy order  
> physical spacetime, in quantum particle waves, stars, galaxies, and  
> myriad forms of sentient forms -- culminating in conscious human  
> beings that are analogous microcosms of the macrocosm... Just like  
> the teachings of the Hindu Vedas, the Buddhist Kiu-Te or Book of  
> the Golden Precepts, and the Hebrew Kabbala's interpretation of the  
> Pentateuch (Old Testament Bible).
>
> In addition, this theory leaves room for a "God we Trust" -- since  
> the primal beginning or "Singularity" has built into it, a cosmic  
> all seeing consciousness, and an immutable law or governance of a  
> perfectly harmonious nature... So long as individual human greed  
> doesn't interfere with it... And by so doing, setting up  
> disharmonious dissonances resulting in reactive retributional  
> responses (karma).  Thus -- since individual consciousness (linked  
> to its initial higher order triune monad fields in hyperspace) is  
> indestructible and can be expressed anywhere -- we are doomed to  
> reflectively re-experience the karma we individually and  
> collectively make, through endless lifetimes of suffering... As the  
> Buddha pointed out (and the similarly misunderstood Christ echoed  
> three centuries later).  So, I'm not much of a fan of a falsely  
> based reductive science that continues to feed and condone the  
> greed -- with its technological assistance that leads to more and  
> more warfare, strife and suffering, and its denial of the true,  
> inter-connective nature of fundamental reality... Thus fostering  
> the worship of false Gods by those willing to ignore the real  
> essence of the teachings of their religion's founder and teacher.
>
>
> On Jan 2, 2008, at 1/2/088:46 AM, HELEN CHENEY wrote:
>
> Leon,
>
> Since you is always complaining about my nitpicking your theory,  
> below is a rendition of my 26d model based on string theories. The  
> subspace of compactified balls of space may correspond to your  
> hyperspace. It's somewhat like an aether
>
>
> THE SUBSPACE    A 26 dimensional model based on all string theories
>  An idea so simple that one wonders why it has not been stated before:
>
> I. Compactification:
>
> Most of you understand the basics of superstring theory
> That starting with 10 dimensions, for 3 to expand in a timely way
> 6 dimensions have to break up and form tiny balls.
>
> How does string theory explain where the 10 dimensional space came  
> from, what it is composed of, and why/how the 6 dimensions had to  
> break up and form tiny balls of, presumedly, the same fundamental  
> Space stuff?
>
> The most obvious question is:
> Where did these Planck-scale balls of space go?
> And the most obvious answer is:
> They did not go anywhere.
>
> They are still with us throughout the universe
> Planck sized balls microscopically scattered
> But denser than the densest fluid
>
> I'll buy that.  But it still doesn't tell me anything about the  
> real nature of those "space balls" (or should I ask Mel Brooks?;-)  
> Nor does it explain how they are electrodynamically interconnected  
> with each other, along with the overall mother space fields and its  
> 4-dimensional spacetime?
>
> String theorists solved the equations of superstring theory so  
> successfully
> that they got a landscape of possible ball configurations called  
> manifolds and
> are apparently hung up trying to select the point of our universe  
> in that landscape
>
> I say use OCCUM?s Razor and just pick the simplest manifold, which is:
>
> The use of Occam's razor is just a cop out to justify reductive  
> materialism, and therefore, the conclusion made is an assertive  
> assumption that is not a logically valid or true nature of the  
> "landscape" or its contents labeled "our universe".
>
> Assume a spatial configuration of dimensions with 3 dimensions  
> collinear
> That is three coordinate systems lie in the east west direction
> And the same for north-south and up-down.
> In order for one dimension in each direction to expand,
> the other two have to break up and roll up
>
> Why?  What's the basis of that assumption?
>
> The break up is essential and likely happens randomly
> So that at some points in expanding space
> The amount of space rolled up is greater than others
>
> What has any of this to do with an explanation of actual reality?   
> Why does the two other spaces have to roll up for the other to  
> expand?  Unless the cross section of those presumedly spherical  
> fields are actually in the form of a figure eight knot -- just like  
> the necessary fractally involved triune Monadic fields of my ABC  
> cosmogenesis... Which also line up on each axis of the spherical  
> megaspace, as higher order light and dark matter-energy fields.   
> But, if so, then superstring theory has to be based on those  
> fractally involved cosmogenetic fields... And, thus, the assumption  
> that they "break up" and "roll up randomly" is nothing more than an  
> unfounded presumption to fit the SUSY mathematics.
>
>
> If you can picture it,
> the rolling up of each compactified dimension
> Produces a spin effect.
> Each compactified point contains six loops of subspace
> With 6 orthogonal spin vectors in every direction:
> north, south, east, west, up and down
>
> Wouldn't it be far much more logical and parsimonious to assume  
> that it's the spin that causes the fields to radiate and involve on  
> a particular polar axes rather than making the back assward  
> assumption that its the magically created SYSY fields that cause  
> the spin.  But, I'll have to admit that the the numbers correspond  
> with ABC theory -- since the 6 rolled up fields on each axis  
> correspond to the fractally involved inner fields of the Second  
> Logos, or the lower physical-astral inner fields of the third Logos.
>
>  10d superstring theory with Occum's Razor predicts that
> the subspace is a 3D array of 6 orthogonal spins of variable strength
> A landscape of spins to carry information on
>
> None of this makes any sense unless we understand the genesis of  
> the so called "subspace".  It's much simpler to assume that the six  
> hyperspace 3D fields (of light matter-energy) are inside the  
> overall 3D metric spacetime gravitational field... In accord with  
> the fractal bubbles within bubbles configuration, as shown in the  
> ABC topological geometry diagrams.  This would come to 21 total  
> directional dimensions of the light matter fields (including the  
> overall mother field), and along with the the dark matter fields  
> would total 57.  In addition there would be a total of 12 inner  
> fields on the second and third logos of the light matter -- which  
> seems to correspond to the 12 psychophysical 12 field theory of BEB  
> -- which, like SS/M theory, until ABC, never had any consciousness  
> consistent logical causal basis to justify it.
>
> In this ABC view, dark matter-energy fields, except for overall  
> spatial gravitional effects, would be entirely passive with respect  
> to the light matter-energy fields -- since they are enfolded on  
> different axes of the overall gravitational *mother* field.   
> However, since it's possible and most likely probable that the dark  
> matter fields have never broken symmetry, and haven't precipitated  
> any mass-energy forms, there would be no possible electrodynamic or  
> chemical interaction between the light and dark matter-energy  
> fields -- other than those effects contributing to observed  
> gravitational lensing, universal expansion, galactic rotation, etc.
>
> It's also perfectly natural that the inner lower order light and  
> dark matter fields of the third fractal iteration (or 3rd Logos) on  
> each light-dark axis, gradually becomes more and more dense as they  
> continue to evolve down to the level of the physical quantum  
> particle fields, and below that through the ZPE fields in the  
> Planck dimension.  In my view, the only dimensions are the three  
> axial or six polar directions or linear extensions in each of the  
> spherical hyperspace fields... Although we might also call each  
> level of inner fractal fields, different "dimensions" of frequency- 
> energy phase orders enfolded within the overall mother spacetime  
> field. All of these fractal involutions, one inside the other,  
> etc., etc. -- being entirely analogous and corresponding, as well  
> as contributing to the overall holographic nature of all existences  
> on both sub or metaphysical and physical levels of reality.  Thus  
> concluding that mind and memory fields are separate from yet  
> electrodynamically and holographically (informationally)  
> interconnected with all brain-body fields.
>
> So, how can "spin" itself carry information -- when only the  
> vibrating *spin field* surfaces of the coadunate ABC fields can  
> carry the frequency modulated wave interference patterns that are  
> the holographically encoded information underlying both material  
> constructions and conscious experience?  However if you consider  
> the spin moments of the singularity as carrying information that is  
> directly available to pure universal consciousness at the entangled  
> zero-points of Absolute or primal SPACE -- then that is another  
> story unrelated to phenomenal individualized self reflective  
> consciousness (awareness, will, qualia, etc,) experienced on the  
> physical metric plane.
>
> But there is more: the need for supersymmetry in 10d theory
>
> II. Supersymmetry:
>
> Closed loop 26d string theory allows for the creation of bosons,
> mainly gravity whereas Supersymmetry in necessary to make fermions  
> or matter
>
> In 10d string theory at the point of creation of a fermion
> A sfermion, a boson, the fermions superpartner, must also be created
> And for completeness whenever a photon is created
> Its superpartner the photino, a fermion, is also created, and so on.
>
> Physicist do acknowledge that the superpartners are still with us
> and they likely make up what is called Dark Matter.
>
> As I explained above, the Dark Matter fields have nothing to do  
> with the so called "superpartners" -- which could be limited to the  
> light matter fields only, on the physical and astral levels that  
> electromagnetically interact, and thus generate quantum and sub  
> quantum effects that can be mathematically predicted.   
> Unfortunately, there's no way that such mathematics can predict the  
> actual nature and cause of the "superpartners"  (which I think some  
> scientists consider as antimatter or particles of opposite  
> chirality).  In any event, since string physics is based on the  
> same reductive materialism assumptions as quantum physics, I don't  
> give those theories much credence when it comes to describing or  
> explaining the true nature of multidimensional spatial reality on  
> the sub-physical or spiritual-mental levels.  Therefore, I prefer  
> to go along with Einstein, when he said "God doesn't play dice" --  
> with reference to indeterminacy theories, and stick with his  
> original ideas about absolute zero-point singularities, aether,  
> black/light holes, curved space, gravitational tension, initial  
> symmetry, quantum and photoelectric reality, etc., etc... All of  
> which is the foundational basis of ABC theory -- that must also  
> underlie all reductive SUSY and string theories.
>
> Unless the superpartners somehow decay away
> They are extremely numerous being equal to the
>  number of  fermions plus anti-fermions before recombination.
> Recombination annihilated almost all the physical fermions in our  
> universe
> Being so numerous the superpartners must form an almost massless  
> dense fluid
> Since each superpartner has a global wave function, the fluid is a  
> galactic BEC
>
> This conclusion (BEC) makes some sense... But I think its  
> assumptive basis is far too speculative to be taken seriously --  
> except by physicists trying to justify reductive materialism.  In  
> my bottom up view the source of the galactic BEC is based on the  
> fundamental cyclic "spin" momentum that endows all primal radiant  
> fields with wave functions (as their fundamental vibrational  
> frequency). Thus, the initial fields are in a different higher  
> frequency energy order of primal space and are enfolded everywhere  
> in the Planck space and standing in a parallel hyperspace that,  
> besides generating and empowering all fundamental particle fields  
> -- links, informationally, to the light matter-energy space through  
> phase conjugate adaptive resonance processes.  Thus, bringing  
> consciousness into physical conjunction with all material substance  
> fields... The one thing left out of all reductive scientific  
> theories that wrongly assumes consciousness as an epiphenomena of  
> material or neural complexity.
>
> III. Numerology
>
> We are at the point of trying to combine closed loop (bosonic) 26d  
> string theory
> With 10d superstring theory (closed bosonic and open fermionic loops)
>
> We need two postulates:
> 1. Our universe is a 3D brane in a much larger 3D space
> 2. Two-time physics applies to 26d string theory
>
> That is our universe is a (3D+T) brane embedded in a (3D+T) megaspace
> So subtracting the 8 expanding dimensions we get
> 18 compactified dimensions that I wager come in 3 sets
>
> One set of 6 compactified balls of space allowed the expansion of  
> megaspace
>
> And because of supersymmetry
> Two sets of 6 compactified balls of space created our universe
> One set being associated with our physical universe
> And one set more associated with the supersymmetric partners
>
> In essence each dimension carried a certain amount of phase space.
> In our megaspace model compactification of 2/3rds of the total  
> initial phase space
> allowed the expansion of the other third
> But for each universe 6/7ths of the available phase space is  
> compactified
> To expand the other 7th
>
> Except for the confusion between spatial "dimensions" or descending  
> fractally involved phase orders of frequency energy, with the  
> metric "dimensions" of extension, and the confusion of the the  
> initial inner field dualities with the fundamental trinities -- I  
> can see how some of this "numerology" corresponds with the Super  
> symmetrical fields within fields, within fields, of the ABC theory  
> prior to the breaking of symmetry on the fourth lowest frequency- 
> energy order physical plane.
>
> IV. The Levels of Reality as landscapes
>
> 1. Space and coincident megaspace (empty)
>
> 2. Physical Matter (sparse)
>
> 3. Frictionless fluid of superpartners (quite dense around galaxies)
>
> 4,5,6. Three sets of stationary compactified phase space
> With 6 orthogonal spins at each point
> Each set carrying different levels of information
>  (very dense everywhere in the universe)
>
> 7. And below that, virtual space (perhaps an even denser collection  
> of virtual particles)
>
> V. Quantum Mechanics of the Landscapes
>
> The Uncertainty Principle teaches us that
> Virtual particles exist in Planck-sized point volumes
> And in even smaller point volumes, the unified field
>
> These virtual particles allow for the transfer of energy
> from the wave function to the particle (e.g., photon to electron)
> during wave function collapse.
> The likelihood of any point in space collapsing the wave function
> is a random process weighted by the amplitude of the wave function
> because virtual particles are randomly generated
>
> According to the Conway-Kochen Theorem quantum mechanics
> cannot be deterministic due to the randomness of the virtual  
> particles.
> This is called the free will theorem and may be related to  
> consciousness
> if consciousness is the ability to make choices
>
> But I have always thought that wave functions were consciousness,
> and it may be that wave functions propagate
> on the sets of compactified space
> like it is an aether
>
> How could wave functions be consciousness?  When all they can do,  
> as all reason and fundamental geometry coupled with electrodynamic  
> phase conjugate adaptive resonance indicates, is physically carry  
> the information or contents of consciousness from the brain  
> processed EM sensory fields and the higher order memory fields  
> through the mind field to the zero-point centers of conscious  
> perception, and the force of willful intent from the surrounding  
> zero-point spinergy through the brain to the neuromuscular  
> system.   Rational argument based on pure geometrical logic, is far  
> more predictive of actual reality, both subjectively and  
> objectively, than such wildly speculative assumptions.
>
> If so, then compactified space (your hyperspace) is consciousness
> and in addition contains all the structural info to make our world  
> work
> as you have said. But our visible consciousness is the result of  
> wave collapse
> at Planck-sized points of virtual space with the unified (or GUT)  
> field at its center.
>
> This cannot be entirely true, since consciousness as pure  
> subjective awareness, will, qualia, etc) could not be caused by  
> objective matter or any forms of space time, no matter how tenuous  
> such fields are in hyperspace.  Besides, "wave collapse" (whatever  
> that means in actual reality) is no indication of subjective  
> consciousness.  Such pure consciousness can only be the functional  
> aspect of the zero-point of absolute space at the center of the  
> source of all ZPE.  Call it the GUT field if you will -- but it  
> still remains outside of all physical time and space... Since all  
> conscious awareness, on whatever plane of spatial reality, must  
> ultimately be referenced to absolute zero.  Even though such zero- 
> point is part of the next higher order phase space (through the  
> wormhole, so to speak).  Thus, we can say that relative to the  
> absolute zero of the highest order GUT field, the zero-point of the  
> lower (4th) order physical plane has a micro particular metric --  
> equivalent to some fraction of the Planck length, if not the Plank  
> length itself (which should be filled with ZPE fields that are  
> super-symetrically fractally involved, and make up virtual 3D space).
>
>
> I believe that to transfer energy from a photon to an electron,
> or any other gauge particle interaction
> that the GUT field state must be passed thru
> as all particles except gravitons are equal in that state.
>
> So in my modeling I have derived a subspace of spins (hyperspace)
> and have pointed out the singularity-like nature of virtual space.
> (Your absolute space may be my megaspace)
>
> Could be -- if your "megaspace" is entirely unconditioned and  
> exists solely as a source of infinite *Spinergy* outside of all  
> metric time and space -- capable of birthing infinite spherical  
> universes parallel to this universe.  I would say, however, that  
> your megaspace is probably my first Logos of cosmic space.  See:  
> http://members.aol.com/leonmaurer/Chakrafield-spherical-col_3.jpg
>
> In addition Barron's 12d world falls out as the two sets of  
> compactified space
> for physical matter and its superpartners.
> He claims that both sets are needed for wave collapse
> But that would just be to the GUT level
> All three sets of compactified space are needed to get to the  
> unified field
>
> As I said before, BEB's 12d world can only be part of the physical  
> level of the 3rd Logos, after it completes its three fractal  
> iterations...  Since, his psychophysical dimensions would have to  
> refer solely to that 4th level enfoldment of my megaspace after  
> symmetry breaking.  This is because so called "wave  
> collapse" (which in my view is a contrived QM term that has nothing  
> to do with awareness) can only occur at the quantum level in 3D  
> metric space.   But, then BEB has no conception of the fractal  
> fields of consciousness that exist as ZPE in the hyperspace that  
> permeates all objective material forms, and links the neurology and  
> other cellular structures of the body directly to zero-point  
> consciousness through the medium of those mind-memory information  
> carrying fields. The following illustrations explain these field  
> relationships far better than I can in words.
> http://users.aol.com/leonmaurer/Chakrafielddiag-fig.col.jpg
> http://users.aol.com/leonmaurer/THOTH_IN_DIAMOND_SAMADHI.jpg
>
>
> But the unified field is only needed to exchange energy
> between a graviton and say an electron
> So maybe the GUT level is sufficient inside the Planck point
> and 12 dimension compactification is sufficient to run this world
> in agreement with Barron Burrows
>
> Maybe.  But, if so, that might only cover the superficial objective  
> aspects of the world. ;-)
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Leon Maurer
> To: HELEN CHENEY
> Cc: Philip Benjamin
> Sent: Friday, December 21, 2007 7:48 PM
> Subject: Re: SUSY Universe
>
>
> On Dec 21, 2007, at 12/21/077:13 AM, HELEN CHENEY wrote:
>
> WOW, Leon. This contradicts everything you have ever said about  
> consciousness.
> What ARE you smokin'
>
> "consciousness (awareness, will, qualia, etc.) is an emergent  
> property of neural complexity.  "
>
> Don't you ever comprehend what you read in context?
>
> That was said in reference to what reductive scientists (like you)  
> believe about consciousness, and the reason why they can't  
> comprehend the hyperspace reality behind my ABC theory (which is  
> NOT "reductive" science) -- based on the proposition that  
> consciousness necessarily must be the fundamental nature of  
> ubiquitous absolute SPACE in a holographic universe that is  
> fundamentally electrodynamic in nature.
>
> Therefore, all my physics is based on metric space being a *plasma*  
> and gravity being nothing more that an electrostatic force... Take  
> it or leave it, as you will.  If that's "pseudo science" -- then  
> you might as well throw all the plasma, string and M-brane  
> physicists in the same boat -- since their theories of cosmology  
> and cosmogenesis substantially contradict quantum physics, standard  
> model, big bang, inflation, etc.
>
> So, I won't waste any more time trying to penetrate your thick skull.
>
> P.S. I also hope you don't mind my publishing the ABC explanations  
> in these letters, based on your comments, in my forthcoming book.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Leon Maurer
> To: HELEN CHENEY
> Cc: Philip Benjamin
> Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2007 11:40 PM
> Subject: Re: SUSY Universe
>
> Richard,
>
> I'm also amazed at how little insight you DO have -- when you can't  
> see that the whole SUSY Universe discussed in that paper is more  
> speculative reductive scientific baloney (or should I say  
> masturbation) trying to prove that matter alone is the cause of  
> everything.  They'll keep on going -- like the Energizer rabbit --  
> until it gets so complex no one can understand it.  How anyone can  
> even imagine that dark matter has anything to do with  
> consciousness, without any rational argument that consciousness can  
> even be an epiphenomena of any form of matter, is beyond me.
>
> It seems that reductive physicists will reach for any straw to try  
> and maintain their blind belief that matter is primary and  
> causative.  Now you are even trying to twist the soul into being an  
> epiphenomena of dark matter  -- when the real "soul" can only be  
> absolute consciousness coupled with the highest order field of  
> spiritual mind, both of which are totally independent of all forms  
> of physical matter, including the brain -- except that they all  
> stem from the same fundamental root of primal SPACE that is both  
> potentially conscious and infinitely energetic as well as eternal.
>
> The whole theoretical reductive science game, in spite of  
> continually ignoring consciousness as the primary cause of all  
> change, is just coming closer and closer to the ABC model that --  
> without all that contrived and renormalized mathematical garbage to  
> justify eliminative materialism -- sees the whole system starting  
> with a fractally involving supersymmetry... With the present metric  
> spacetime universe, after inflation and breaking of symmetry,  
> evolving out of the image information and energy compacted into  
> ubiquitous zero point sources of absolute SPACE (acting initially  
> like a BEC "singularity") and subsequently generating particles,  
> atoms, molecules, galaxies, stars, planets, moons, etc., in accord  
> with scientific laws... Followed by the evolution of sentient  
> beings on a suitable home planet... To ultimately form mankind...  
> And then, continually expanding until all forms eventually  
> dissipate and resolve back into a higher order supersymmetry...  
> Until the whole cyclic process repeats on a higher level of  
> evolution and intelligence based on its gained experience and  
> knowledge...  With all of it having the ideation of human forms  
> already built into the holographic image of the entire present  
> cosmos right from the primal beginning.
>
> Thus the whole aim and purpose of the "universe" must be for the  
> birth and evolution of present mankind -- to fulfill its own  
> destiny of expanding its own consciousness from one to many and  
> back to one again -- while gaining infinite experience and  
> knowledge in the process -- (at no cost to itself,  
> incidentally ;-)  Whatever the next cycle might portent for  
> universal consciousness and Mind is beyond the comprehension of our  
> finite minds at this stage of our evolution.
>
> Read your own Hindu Bhagavad Gita where Krishna (representing the  
> spirit or consciousness of the primal source -- absolute SPACE)  
> says, "I create the whole world with one small part of myself and  
> yet remain separate (undiminished)" -- From frontispiece, W.Q.Judge  
> transliteration, Theosophy Company edition.  You might also read  
> Judge's essay on Chapter 1 <http://wwwtheosociety.org/pasadena/gita/ 
> eg1.htm#t2>
>
> So, unless we each -- (as an individual conscious mind beings,  
> realize our inherent nature and who and what we are) -- join up  
> with it... The joke is on us... And, as the Buddha said, we must  
> pay the piper and suffer for our own ignorance. :-[  Well that's  
> too bad for those that follow the false prophets and lose it along  
> the way.
>
> So, maybe you should read deeper into the theosophical teachings  
> and find out what the human "soul" really is, and why the universe  
> has to evolve in the general direction that ultimately results in  
> human beings on earth having to work out their own individual karma  
> -- or to its living hell be damned... Since the universal  
> consciousness couldn't give a hoot what happens to the pieces of  
> its worthless and expendable matter while they churn around  
> gathering infinite degrees of possible experiences that,  
> individually, don't amount to anything more than tempests in a  
> teapot to the global consciousness witnessing it all.  But, enough  
> philosophizing...
>
> For a picture of how this universal evolutionary cycle transforms  
> from absolute spatial supersymmetry to hyperspatial symmetry, then  
> to total material (metric spacial) asymmetry, to ultimately reverse  
> through symmetry back to the original supersymmetry -- to repeat  
> the dual cycle over again on a higher level of informational  
> knowledge and experience -- see: http://users.aol.com/uniwldarts/ 
> uniworld.artisans.guild/evolution2.html
>
> The notes on this diagram need some revision, but nevertheless, the  
> symbolic diagram shows the stages or phases and cycles of  
> involution and evolution correctly. All we have to do is realize  
> that holographic information is paramount and precedes all forms of  
> matter, and that consciousness is a fundamental quality of Absolute  
> SPACE that is timeless, dimensionless, and everywhere hidden in the  
> center of the hyperspatial information carrying fields encircling  
> each potentially (sensorially) conscious zero-point of absolute  
> SPACE in the vastness of metric space-time.  Thus, supersymmetry,  
> superstrings, supergravity leads to symmetry, strings, gravity,  
> leads to asymmetry, particles, strong and electroweak forces,  
> etc. ... All, consisting of light matter-energy and two mirrored  
> dark matter-energies, existing as separate and independent  
> holograms at perpendicular angles of spin, having their own  
> parallel natures, experiences and potential consciousness. And,  
> except for a common ± gravity -- totally invisible and dynamically  
> unconnected to each other -- but part of the same overall space-time.
>
> Keeping in mind the holographic nature of everything (and the  
> analogy and correspondence between all systems governed by the laws  
> of cycles)... Consider that all forms of nature (in our light  
> matter universe) are the evolving image expressions of nothing but  
> pure information (intelligence)... And, notice that the human race  
> in its present state of evolution (analogous to the overall cosmic  
> evolution) is only at the middle of its V (fifth) root racial  
> cycle.  At this point, its collective knowledge of overall reality  
> would be just beginning to emerge, as consciousness slowly begins  
> to understand its creative dominion over matter... And yet, as  
> individual self reflective beings, we still don't know how to unify  
> and control or guide matter's evolution without creating  
> continuously repetitive disorder, based on conflictive "scientific"  
> or empirical thinking, motivated by selfishness... Which, due to  
> ignorance of our real nature, results in periodic rising and  
> falling of social and economic systems... All of which are  
> inevitably flawed by their separatist materialistic viewpoint --  
> whether religious or secular... With all of it stemming from the  
> basic blind belief that each man is his brain-body and identifies  
> with it... When, in reality, they are each nothing more than pure  
> consciousness (mind beings) along with the accumulated experiential  
> information it has gathered around itself since it first awakened  
> at the primal beginning of this universal cycle as an individual  
> zero-point ray of the cosmic consciousness coupled with the  
> analogous fields of its triune higher mind (monad).
>
> I wonder if anyone who reads my ABC hypothesis has even gotten the  
> slightest inkling of the underlying hyperspace reality that  
> actually exists...     Although, I understand how difficult it is  
> to look at things from the bottom up or inside out... Especially,  
> after convincing oneself that the only way to comprehend the world,  
> or anything in it, is to reductively analyze it from the top down  
> or outside in... With that method based on the self-conditioned  
> false belief that the whole must be the sum of its parts, that  
> matter is the only reality, that everything exists separate from  
> everything else , and that consciousness (awareness, will, qualia,  
> etc.) is an emergent property of neural complexity.
>
> Oh well, as Alfred Newman said, "What me worry?"  That's their  
> problem -- along with every other reductive scientific thinker who  
> can't see the forest for the trees, or realize that the egg and the  
> chicken can't exist independently of each other. :-)
>
> Have a happy holiday season,
>
> Leon
>
>
>
>
> .
>
>
> On Dec 15, 2007, at 12/15/071:37 PM, HELEN CHENEY wrote:
>
> I found the reference for the  SUSY Universe I mentioned  
> previously. My model of reality has such a universe as the  
> particles of Dark Matter. Our universe was coupled to a SUSY  
> universe during the Big Bang in order to create fermions according  
> to superstring theory and they are still coupled at least by  
> gravity now. An additional local coupling would be necessary for  
> something like a soul consciousness to exist in Dark Matter, as  
> suggested by OBE and NDE, and by reincarnation as well as revelation.
>
> Clavelli's SUSY universe seemingly has the structure necessary to  
> support intelligent life that a medium of axions-only lacks. We  
> might argue that axions provide the required coupling. But because  
> of Bars papers on Two Time physics, which eliminates the need for  
> axions (no CP violation) and suggests the existence of a megaspace  
> (also suggested by the work of Lisa Randall solving the heirarchy  
> problem), super cosmic reality is likely a great number of paired  
> SUSY and false vacuum (3D+T) universes embedded a (3D+T') megaverse  
> in which essentially only gravity exists.
>
> The megaspace model is not necessary for purposes of understanding  
> the soul. But something like a medium containing atoms and  
> molecules of supersymmetric particles that couple to our physical  
> particles is necessary. Perhaps the coupling can be found in Bars  
> (4D+2T) theory, the prototype of a megaverse theory. Or since they  
> are coupled by gravity, perhaps Higgs particles re-couple the  
> ordinary and superymmetric particles with a force stronger than  
> gravity.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------
>
> Clavelli "Properties of a future susy universe"
> http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/hep-th/pdf/0508/0508207v2.pdf
>
>  It looks to me as though this universe, if it could coexist with a  
> broken symmetry universe, which is the one we live in, would have  
> all the properties          required for a soul to exist in. The  
> properties sound very much like the descriptions I have read in  
> Theosophy about how the soul is rearranged into spherically  
> symmetric entities after death and how atoms are strongly red- 
> shifted. Atoms from Hydrogen to Oxygen are stable so DNA can exist  
> for example. Atoms are nuclei with up to two "fermionic electrons"  
> surrounded by a cloud of selectrons.
>
> Well, look at that. That's the coupling. The supersymmetric atoms  
> contain ordinary electrons. It's an EM coupling, not Higgs. Is  
> there evidence for bioelectrons associated with the biophotons?
>
> Sometimes I am amazed at how little insight I have. The message has  
> to be right in front of my nose and I still did not get it until  
> this instant. I wonder if it will fly.
>
> Richard
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Philip Benjamin
> To: HELEN CHENEY
> Cc: leonmaurer
> Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2007 6:44 PM
> Subject: RE: BEC axion medium
>
> Richard Letter 3
>
> The recent exp result that neurons contain EM fields that are 5  
> times more intense than a lightning bolt reminds me of some of  
> Leon's insights. That level of intensity is likely to come from the  
> ZPE of the false vacuum. SED theory suggests that QM comes from ZPE  
> as well as inertial mass. I suspect that ZPE, (which BTW is not a  
> property of the SS universe, that is it's zero, a true vacuum),  
> somehow comes form the megaspace and is relevant to Leon's insight  
> about the source of consciousness. But I wish Leon would remove the  
> layers of seeming scientific terminology with which he hides his  
> insight.
> _________________________
>
> What does this intensity mean in practical terms? How long it  
> lasts? What exactly can it do to generate self-awareness? Or  
> Computations? Or Cognition? I came aross a speed of over 200 miles/ 
> hour for the breath/blast of sneezing!!!  All these insights and  
> imaginations are useful, only if they can be yoked to an observable  
> or perceivable REALITY. How can you solve a "REAL" problem with an  
> imaginary solution.
>
>
> Letter 2
> Have you seen Hammeroff's latest about the pilot/autopilot. He  
> talks of a web. That makes sense to me as something macroscopic  
> that could be in quantum coherence or entangled. There may be a web  
> of microtubles. Stuart talked of a dentrite and an axon web.
> ___________________
>
> Yes, he was kind enough to reply me also. He has done a lot in this  
> field. But is he getting anywhere? Why should a WEB of microtubules  
> create anything other than what it is programed to do? What is new  
> about axon-net work? Why should one be Pilot and the other auto- 
> pilate? Is it wishful thinking?
>
> Letter 1
> I too used to work in phase conjugate adaptive optics at Adaptive  
> Optics Associates now owned by United Technology. Our work was  
> secret and predated the open literature papers. In 1975 I got the  
> govt (DARPA) to declassify a paper because they wanted the USSR to  
> increase their funding of space BMD and I became famous for a few  
> days for my paper said that you could propagate an unlimited amount  
> of laser power to space. Of course it was all a spoof. Star Wars  
> was a bluff, which I exposed when they got serious about its de- 
> loyment in 1987. It was inherently vulnerable. As a result Teller  
> and Canavan invented (they claim) the Brilliant Pebbles system  
> which is not vulnerable. Also as a result Henry Kendall lost his  
> life in a suspicious scuba accident. I had been warned that my life  
> was in danger, but Henry got credit for stopping the deployment.
> _____________________
>
>   These are real conscious experiences. You are only describing the  
> experience part. The "Conscious" side must have an explanation.  
> Hologram, resonance, ZPE, entanglement may all be part of this  
> experience.  Physicists including Penrose are making a serious  
> mistake if they get themselves            "boxed" in. When the box  
> is Eastern Mysticism, one can easily get addicted to it much the  
> same way as drug addiction. That will not help to progress. The  
> Eastern mind is very brilliant- a genetic composite of diverse  
> elements. But sience could not begin and grow there at all. That is  
> the problem with all addictions. It is unreal and science is real.
>
> Consciousness as a nebulous, amorphous,invisible, unidentified  
> something which is not a THING is not worth pursuing. We have a  
> well studied EM field. Could there be a parallel non-EM bio-world?  
> Some of these para normal phenomena reports seem genuine-NDE etc. I  
> used to avoid them, because there is so much else to read. That is  
> how I missed your web site. Especially, I  take those Ghost stories  
> with a ton of salt.
>
> Consciousness must be a TOTAL BODY phenomenon. It must be invisble  
> and permeating (NON-EM), intransient (NON-ENTROPIC).  Restricting  
> it to any specific ANATOMY is a big mistake. Once it was the penial  
> gland, then the Eccles gate, then the microtubules, etc have gotten  
> nowhere. You have to bring everything into the confines of the body  
> and entangled with it. Biophotons also must be factored into. The  
> very fact that Plants are so profuse in biophotons, (animals less  
> and humans the least) is an importnt data so far omitted.
>
> Happy Christmas & Happy Holidays
>
> Philip
>
>
>
> From: HELENDRUMS@msn.com
> To: medinuclear@hotmail.com
> CC: leonmaurer@aol.com
> Subject: Re: BEC axion medium
> Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2007 16:58:15 -0500
>
>
> Phillip & Leon,
>
> Yes. It seems like something I would write. What stopped me from  
> forging ahead was the seeming lack of structure in an axion BEC.  
> And then exp investigations that should have detected the axion  
> failed.
>
> OTOH, the Russians claim to detect microleptons (ie. axions) and  
> developed a quantum theory of information based on it.
>
> But then Bars comes along with his 2 T physics that eliminates the  
> need for the axion.
>
> In addition to all this, the possibility of a supersymmetric  
> universe that is not a false vacuum with a rich structure of  
> elements up          to at least carbon strikes me as the obvious  
> location of what is called heaven, but I would just call it  
> supernatural. BTW_ I have temporally lost the link to the SS  
> universe papers.
>
> Dark Matter is then this SS universe, one that pervades our  
> universe. My speculation is that physical processes in our physical  
> universe including consciousness are somehow imprinted on the SS  
> universe. Leon would say it in the opposite direction.
>
> But then Garrett Lisi comes along with his E8 theory which does  
> away with the need for supersymmetry. It seems that whenever you  
> think you have found a theoretical location for supernatural  
> experience, it soon disappears, theoretically.
>
> BTW, Bars was one of the first, if not the first, to suggest that  
> E8 could be the unification theory of everything way back in 1980  
> at          Yale even before supersymmetry came along and converted  
> most physicists into string believers.
>
> So I see Bars as way ahead of the crowd. Like I said in my last  
> email, Bars theory could verify Mitchell's claim of a quantum  
> hologram that stores the history of all physical objects and it  
> seems to verify Maldecena's conjecture.
>
> Anyway, it seems to be no need for axions.
>
> Richard
>
> PS. The recent exp result that neurons contain EM fields that are 5  
> times more intense than a lightning bolt reminds me of some of  
> Leon's insights. That level of intensity is likely to come from the  
> ZPE of the false vacuum. SED theory suggests that QM comes from ZPE  
> as well as inertial mass. I suspect that ZPE, (which BTW is not a  
> property of the SS universe, that is it's zero, a true vacuum),  
> somehow  comes form the megaspace and is relevant to Leon's insight  
> about the source of consciousness. But I wish Leon would remove the  
> layers of seeming scientific terminology with which he hides his  
> insight.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Philip Benjamin
> To: Ruquist, Richard
> Cc: leonmaurer
> Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2007 11:57 AM
> Subject: BEC axion medium
>
>
> Richard:
>
>  I just found this:
>
> "Briefly, if the BEC axion medium exists, it is the likely site of  
> quantum consciousness. The fundamental postulate is that  
> consciousness is of a quantum nature. Since room temperature BECs  
> are not likely, our physical consciousness is not of a quantum  
> nature, but is driven by the axion quantum consciousness. Words and  
> will are used to collapse the invisible axion waves into visible  
> arrays of axion particles that we perhaps see directly in the dream  
> or OBE state; and which in turn can excite energized physical  
> membrane dipoles in the awake state."
>
> Do you recognize this?  If you do, why not proceed ahead? Why stop  
> here?  Chalmers/Hameroff/Penrose did not get anyehre.
>
> Philip
>
> =
>
> Shed those extra pounds with MSN and The Biggest Loser! Learn more. =


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