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

Fwd: [jcs-online] Kinds of Entanglement (reply to Leon and Tom)

Feb 08, 2008 07:55 PM
by Leon Maurer

I thought this dialogue with a scientist working on consciousness  
might be of interest to students of theosophy.

> From: Leon Maurer <>
> Date: February 6, 2008 12:10:56 AM EST
> To:
> Subject: Re: [jcs-online] Kinds of Entanglement (reply to Leon and  
> Tom)
> Reply-To:
> On Jan 23, 2008, at 1/23/087:12 AM, Alfredo Pereira Jr. wrote:
>> Dear Tom:
>> The question in your last post (about Aspect's experiment) was
>> already answered by myself and John.
>> Dear Leon: Please check my replies below:
>>> ...since most conscious beings are composed of
>>> smaller organismic and cellular beings that also have zero-point
>>> centers of their primal higher order field that serve as sources of
>>> potential nonlocal consciousness.
>> APJ - This "distributed view" of ZP centers makes your proposal more
>> interesting - closer to Jo Edwards' "single-cell consciousness".
>>> [LM]: What particles?
>> APJ - The particles and related energy/information that compose the
>> living body.
> [LM]: I was referring to your claim that particles "self-organize."
> I believe that the so called "particles" are standing waves of pure
> energy that is nothing more than fundamental "space in motion," as
> Einstein said... And that their "self organization" is built into the
> electrodynamics of the frequency modulations of the ZPE fields that
> generate and energize the particle forms... Which expression is
> initiated by the instinctual memory (of the particle's standing wave
> frequency-energy pattern) contained in the zero-point spinergy of
> each particle-wave generated, and cyclically empowered by the
> potential will (latent G-force) of their zero-point SPACE origin.
> Couldn't be any more parsimoniously simple than that. ;-)  Of course,
> the particle, being at the most simple level of organization and
> having no link to the more organized higher order mind-memory fields,
> would have no sentient or self reflected consciousness -- which would
> not become evident until material evolution had progressed to the
> level of life, and after that stage of evolution progressed gradually
> to the primitive animal brain level, until it arrived at the ultimate
> awakened self aware mental level in humans (only partially reflected
> in the higher levels of the animal kingdom).  Therefore, while
> consciousness is everywhere, only the higher organized living beings
> can experience it in varying degrees of self reflection, and
> ultimately, self awareness.  Thus, while I'm sure a lobster can feel
> pain and instinctively react to it -- it cannot remember it,
> anticipate it, or think about it. ;-)
>>> There is no "key metaphysical issue."  Nor is
>>> there any conflict with the empiricism of contemporary science --
>>> when it limits itself only to the proven objective properties of
>>> physical space.
>> APJ - I think there is. For me the living body self-organizes and in
>> this process consciousness is generated (an autopoietic view; the
>> living system is autonomous). For you the consciousness generated in
>> the experience of the living body is determined not by the experience
>> itself but by coadunate fields generated long time ago (radical
>> neoplatonism; hetero-organization).
> [LM]:  There is no objective evidence or rational argument that can
> convince me that subjectivity is an epiphenomena of objectivity -- no
> matter how complex the automatic processes of the brain's neural
> network.  The fact that the living system is autonomous does not
> negate the fact that its the consciousness (awareness, will, etc.)
> coupled with the inherent electrodynamic laws built into the cyclic
> spin of the underlying absolute space, that is the governance of that
> autonomy.  In my view, sentient "life" is dependent on consciousness,
> not on the structures of matter.
> Please don't confuse the long term, archetypal or instinctive
> memories generated by the "experience of a living body" -- with the
> consciousness that is aware of and can willfully think about those
> experiences, discern, discriminate, combine them with other memories,
> and decide on a course if action, etc.  In my ABC field theory of
> cosmogenesis, I use the word "consciousness" as the latent awareness
> and will inherent in the fundamental space that is the foundation of
> all material forms.  Your definition limits consciousness to only the
> subjective experience of thinking mankind.  However, all lower
> sentient beings on the chain of evolution, even without the level of
> mind of the smallest brained animals, are still "conscious" (i.e.,
> aware, willful, etc,)  in one degree or another.  Therefore, mind or
> brain cannot "create" the consciousness I am speaking of.  all the
> brain can do is transform the sensory images into a form that can be
> carried by and stored in long term memory fields and can be accessed
> directly through the short term mind field by perceptive
> consciousness using phase conjugate inductive resonance and
> holographic radiant image reconstructive processes. The brain also
> acts as the transducer between conscious will and the neuromuscular
> system coupled with the EM 3-D body map field of the kinesthetic
> cortex -- so as to coordinate the intentional positioning of the body
> within the the 3-D objective field coupled with the experienced
> visual image field.
>>> This theory (which, apparently, confirms the neo-platonic viewpoint)
>>> does NOT require particles (or the lower order physical standing
>>> waves composing them) to be carrying either the sensory or the mind
>>> memory information of consciousness... Since, that information can
>>> only be carried on the radiant magnetic energy fields (of the  
>>> neurons
>>> and other cells) as modulated wave interference patterns -- which  
>>> are
>>> in phase conjugate adaptive resonance with the higher order fields
>>> that carry the short term mind (working memory) and long term
>>> memory  images.  It's these modulated images that can be detected,
>>> holographically reconstructed, perceived and relatively discerned at
>>> their carrier field's coadunately entangled absolute zero-point
>>> centers of origin.
>> APJ - Exactly! The activity of the living body is irrelevant for the
>> consciousness that is projected into it. Also for Plato and Descartes
>> the appearances (signals coming from the body and its sensors) are
>> not a reliable source of knowledge. Your ZPE takes the place of
>> Plato's Ideas and Descartes's 'Res Cogitans' in the role of
>> controlling the activity of the body.
> [LM]: Yes, but it's not the ZPE or the ZPF that controls the non
> local activities of the body -- but the *awareness* and *will* of
> consciousness inherent in their  zero-point (SPACE) source, coupled
> with the instinctive and autonomic memory information carried on the
> surfaces of the higher order ZP fields (and entangled with our
> individual zero-point (Navel) center of self reflected
> consciousness), that attentively (intentionally) and or
> autonomically, learnedly, and instinctively (inattentively) control
> those activities.
> So there is no conflict with either Plato or Descartes -- since they
> may have had no idea how their ideas of the effects of their
> consciousness actually works, or of the actual metaphysical and
> physical field nature of mind, memory, brain, body, etc.  Although,
> I'm not so sure that Plato didn't comprehend the hierarchy of the
> different states of consciousness and their geometric coadunate but
> not consubstantial nature -- the same way that Pythagorus did -- and
> the later neoplatonists like Plotinus and Porphery further explained
> them.  My fractal geometrically derived ABC fields of consciousness
> seem to be exacrly in conformance with the ancient occult
> philosophical views.
>   Did
> these ancients know much more about the true nature of consciousness,
> mind and body, than all the reductive scientists of today put  
> together?
>>> This functional consciousness information chain easily explains
>>> the feeling of pain, touch, taste, smell, sight, hearing, etc. at
>>> particular zero-points of localized perception -- that are
>>> entangled with the central zero-point of overall self reflective
>>> consciousness (i.e., awareness, will, qualia, attention,  
>>> discernment,
>>> discrimination, determination, decision, intention, etc.).  It also
>>> explains the storage media for all long term, archetypal, autonomic
>>> and instinctive memories -- that are carried on extremely high
>>> frequency phase order ZPE fields whose equivalent higher order
>>> wave-time function allows for much longer retention periods,  
>>> relative
>>> to the physical brain's neural EM fields -- whose image retention
>>> time is limited to only fractions of a second.  If working memory  
>>> (or
>>> any neural memory) were much longer than this, motion would
>>> appear to us as a blur, vocal speech would be garbled, and  
>>> sequential
>>> thought be impossible.
>> APJ - With these improvements your theoretical system seems to work
>> well, but in one sense (not all) it is the opposite of the self-
>> organization model that I adopt for the understanding of
>> consciousness. This difference appears in our different
>> understandings of entanglement (how it is generated, what is
>> entangled and what is the function of entanglement for the living
>> system).
> [LM]  I see entanglement not "generated", but solely as the
> *inherent* nature of the zero-point spinergy at the source of every
> ZPF -- which are all part of the same absolute SPACE that is
> ubiquitous throughout the Planck realm of our spacetime continuum.
> And thus, located everywhere throughout each sentient organism.
> Entanglement, could also refer to the holographic nature of the
> universe that enables the information carried by one hyperspace field
> to influence an adjacent field (by phase conjugate adaptive
> resonance) which are intimately interconnected through the same zero-
> point of origin.  This would account for Aspect's experiments with
> split particles, as well as the entangled nature of a BEC. superfluid
> or superconductor.  All of which, BTW, are pretty much confirmative
> of my ABC model -- which essentially rests on Einstein's relativity
> theories that are based on the Maxwell electrodynamics. Therefore, I
> see that it's the space itself that is entangled -- which, in turn,
> entangles the information fields generated from it. This, then,
> entangles the experience of remote cellular consciousness with the
> center of self reflected consciousness within the same overall body
> field.  Thus, the pain in the fingertip is experienced, localized and
> responded to (post immediate instinctive response) by our individual
> self reflected consciousness.
> Best wishes,
> Leon Maurer

>> Best Regards,
>> Alfredo

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


[Back to Top]

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